Ines & Amari

[NY Fan]

I agree with your sentiment on fun open discussion. If we disagree that is fine. So, back on subject as far injuries, what I noticed was before Geno got sick he spoke of how everything going on made his team both physically and mentally tired. Then CD said the same thing a game or so later.

So with all that said, what happened in the ST Johns game? Geno played his Core. And as I referred to my 1st post on this thread above (I forgot to mention the post #) but the poster UConnCat on post #89 on the UCONN ST Johns postgame thread had a direct quote from CD in which she stated the team is in a good place now. So if both coaches clearly stating warning signs before are now no longer harping on the past warnings, then why should we? They are “telling us things are different now,” aren’t they? They weren’t hiding the team’s issues before. IMO this is a great sign that Geno did this with his Core. Why wouldn’t these two – the greatest wcbb duo ever-make anyone feel uncomfortable with their decisions if they are both saying the same thing but now in a positive way? When things were sort of bad neither hid it. Now when things are looking up, why not get on the same board they are on?

And I did see CD substitutes different than Geno. And I stated that I didn’t like her pattern on past threads. Though it was for so few games I was fine with it. I admit I have a bias though. I grew up in hoop always playing as a guard. But many have biases even imo our UCONN TV Analysts. As a result while I love Kara and Meg (and Rebecca) but they even admit they have low post bias as well. I seriously doubt Sue Bird would have the same view as them. So I tend to think their views have more staying power on a site like this when they support more of what CD was doing, But imo it’s bias but I can still love them even if I think so as I don’t agree. Instead I agree with Geno. I’ve been a fan these many years because I just agree with the “play your best players” and “play fastbreak” which Geno does. He fits exactly how I believe a coach should manage. As a result, I felt he did terrific with ST Johns too.

I could be wrong but that’s why I think your last question does question his philosophy. But in a classy friendly way which you present. You are advocating something he could easily do, but isn’t. Why isn't he? You even mention the 30 point blowouts. Well for years he has had his Core also play in these blowouts working on halfcourt. Not meant one bit as a slam but a legit 2 part either/or question – 1.) You don’t seem to agree with that type of philosophy, do you? You want the ‘Ines” types playing in those 30 pt games? For me, I only want the ‘Ines” types playing when Geno is satisfied with his Core. 2.) Am I probably right to believe that you probably think Ines is better than what Geno thinks?

Thank you, I welcome this kind of exchange. RockyMTblue2 above captures my sentiments.

So re your #1 No, in blowouts I'd prefer to see bench players playing more to help their development as well as to encourage them. If they are truly UConn material players, I don't believe they will remain content with the privilege of sitting on the bench as others have suggested. Game situations are surely a great way to help them reach their potential.

Re #2: Absolutely not! I don't fancy myself as a BB spotter of talent, and I don't know the game well enough, so in that sense I totally trust Geno and CD. I think I see talent in Ines and would hate to lose her, simple as that.

While working on this reply I noticed 2 other posts: Bonedog suggested the possibility we could get worn down by South Carolina's
rotation, especially?hopefully in an NC game played within 2 days of Final Four game. It sure looked like we were tired in last year's NC game.

#1Florida wondered given the past 25 years success, why raise questions re anything related to Geno? OK, questions for you and Beneyard: a) Why have the Boneyard? b) Is it merely there as a cheering chorus? c) BTW - Why have the post prior to each game speculating on what one would like to see in that game; why not simply leave it to Geno and be satisfied to wait for the game?

 

[Skeets]

I agree that Ines is already looking like a competent player, with upside. She can certainly be counted on to provide quality minutes at the point, when needed. With both Nika and Azzi healthy, that need is somewhat diminished. Next season will be an even greater challenge, if Paige is healthy, Azzi and Nika are healthy and KK has joined the competition. In other words, Ines is going to have to improve exponentially to earn any time at all. And, sadly, she might become candidate to relocate. But she is already an asset for this season. As for Amari, it is hard to believe she was such a highly regarded recruit. I have been a major supporter for her, but she really produces little. Yes, she can stand at the top of the key and see cutters and get the ball to them. And, from time to time, can block a shot under or near the basket. But she has poor ball control and has lost all confidence in shooting. By poor ball control, I mean she has weak or" bad" hands. Her rebounding is accidental not earned. I keep hoping to see more value and maybe the coaches do as well. She did get some nice exposure vs. St. Johns. But had little to show for it. A missed lay up is just not acceptable for offense. So, her opportunity window will close quickly when Ice Brady shows up; not to mention the center from Egypt. I am reminded that Tina Charles did not emerge until her junior year. But I think she showed more, early, than Amari has. Anyone remember?

Tina had a bad shoulder early in her career. Does anyone remember if it was surgically repaired?

 

[oldude]

I didn't think it was especially derogatory since it is probably pretty close to factual. Maybe we have different interpretations of "wonderful" because in a basketball context I just don't see it. What "wonderful post skills" has she shown?

For me wonderful post skills = Edwards and Juhasz.

Amari has good hands, footwork, passing skills, a really nice shooting touch in the paint, the ability to body up opposing Bigs, block shots and rebound. What I point out in my original post on the subject is that the game is moving too fast for her right now, and the only way for Amari to get comfortable with the speed of the game is to get sufficient PT in actual games, approximately 15-20 mpg.

 

[HuskyNan]

Thank you, I welcome this kind of exchange. RockyMTblue2 above captures my sentiments.

So re your #1 No, in blowouts I'd prefer to see bench players playing more to help their development as well as to encourage them. If they are truly UConn material players, I don't believe they will remain content with the privilege of sitting on the bench as others have suggested. Game situations are surely a great way to help them reach their potential.

Re #2: Absolutely not! I don't fancy myself as a BB spotter of talent, and I don't know the game well enough, so in that sense I totally trust Geno and CD. I think I see talent in Ines and would hate to lose her, simple as that.

While working on this reply I noticed 2 other posts: Bonedog suggested the possibility we could get worn down by South Carolina's
rotation, especially?hopefully in an NC game played within 2 days of Final Four game. It sure looked like we were tired in last year's NC game.

#1Florida wondered given the past 25 years success, why raise questions re anything related to Geno? OK, questions for you and Beneyard: a) Why have the Boneyard? b) Is it merely there as a cheering chorus? c) BTW - Why have the post prior to each game speculating on what one would like to see in that game; why not simply leave it to Geno and be satisfied to wait for the game?

If you use the @ before typing a poster’s name, it will send that person an alert. Such as @NY Fan

 

[HuskyNan]

Tina had a bad shoulder early in her career. Does anyone remember if it was surgically repaired?

Yes, during a summer break.

 

[hoophuskee]

Thank you, I welcome this kind of exchange. RockyMTblue2 above captures my sentiments.

So re your #1 No, in blowouts I'd prefer to see bench players playing more to help their development as well as to encourage them. If they are truly UConn material players, I don't believe they will remain content with the privilege of sitting on the bench as others have suggested. Game situations are surely a great way to help them reach their potential.

Re #2: Absolutely not! I don't fancy myself as a BB spotter of talent, and I don't know the game well enough, so in that sense I totally trust Geno and CD. I think I see talent in Ines and would hate to lose her, simple as that.

While working on this reply I noticed 2 other posts: Bonedog suggested the possibility we could get worn down by South Carolina's
rotation, especially?hopefully in an NC game played within 2 days of Final Four game. It sure looked like we were tired in last year's NC game.

#1Florida wondered given the past 25 years success, why raise questions re anything related to Geno? OK, questions for you and Beneyard: a) Why have the Boneyard? b) Is it merely there as a cheering chorus? c) BTW - Why have the post prior to each game speculating on what one would like to see in that game; why not simply leave it to Geno and be satisfied to wait for the game?

In regards to blowouts I’m more concerned about the development of the Core. For example, what weaknesses do you think Nika and Aubrey have? Not only would I love to see them go Pro, but for UCONN, imagine if Nika or Aubrey could become more confident shooting the ball from the outside? Wouldn’t the team be exponentially better if just one of them made this improved jump? This is an example of why you play the Core / why Geno has played his past Core so long. It highlights his strength as a coach. Even CD mentioned in her postgame on TV that Dorka’s variety makes the team that much harder to guard. Imagine if either (or both) Nika and Aubrey can become more consistent with outside shooting? That adds more variety to the team.

Because what’s the best way these players can work on these issues? With limited minutes? Why not give them further opportunity in blowouts? When the game is close they will rarely do it. In 30 point decided games, they can work on these things. Let’s face it, the elite teams are going to do everything they can to force Nika and Aubrey to shoot. The very point you are making for Ines is the exact point I’m making for The Core, and in particular Nika and Aubrey; to help their development. They are god now but wouldn’t it be extremely exciting by giving them those extra minutes that Geno is in essence “encouraging them” to be even more? And if minutes could help Ines and Amri, why can’t it further help Nika and Aubrey? Imo the payoff that possibly one of these players can do surpasses what Amari and Ines can do for this year. These are proven players. Way too much of a gamble to “hope” for Ines or Amari Also, UCONN had several tight games in NCAA before South Carolina. You have to prepare for more than just SC.

As a result, I realize you and Rocky and others are more concerned with being worn down. We have diffences here I suppose,. I’m more concerned with making the Core as best as it could be. Also, as you mention posts from Bonedog. And yet he did also mention that our Core could win. Our chances improve if Nika or Aubrey can hit shots.

 

[NY Fan]

If you use the @ before typing a poster’s name, it will send that person an alert. Such as @NY Fan

Thank you, will do.

In regards to blowouts I’m more concerned about the development of the Core. For example, what weaknesses do you think Nika and Aubrey have? Not only would I love to see them go Pro, but for UCONN, imagine if Nika or Aubrey could become more confident shooting the ball from the outside? Wouldn’t the team be exponentially better if just one of them made this improved jump? This is an example of why you play the Core / why Geno has played his past Core so long. It highlights his strength as a coach. Even CD mentioned in her postgame on TV that Dorka’s variety makes the team that much harder to guard. Imagine if either (or both) Nika and Aubrey can become more consistent with outside shooting? That adds more variety to the team.

Because what’s the best way these players can work on these issues? With limited minutes? Why not give them further opportunity in blowouts? When the game is close they will rarely do it. In 30 point decided games, they can work on these things. Let’s face it, the elite teams are going to do everything they can to force Nika and Aubrey to shoot. The very point you are making for Ines is the exact point I’m making for The Core, and in particular Nika and Aubrey; to help their development. They are god now but wouldn’t it be extremely exciting by giving them those extra minutes that Geno is in essence “encouraging them” to be even more? And if minutes could help Ines and Amri, why can’t it further help Nika and Aubrey? Imo the payoff that possibly one of these players can do surpasses what Amari and Ines can do for this year. These are proven players. Way too much of a gamble to “hope” for Ines or Amari Also, UCONN had several tight games in NCAA before South Carolina. You have to prepare for more than just SC.

As a result, I realize you and Rocky and others are more concerned with being worn down. We have diffences here I suppose,. I’m more concerned with making the Core as best as it could be. Also, as you mention posts from Bonedog. And yet he did also mention that our Core could win. Our chances improve if Nika or Aubrey can hit shots.

If I weren't replying to your post, I'd have flagged it with a "Like". Of course I'd love it if Nika and Aubrey could contribute by hitting more shots, but at this point I can't help but think Nika in her 3rd year is playing who she is - to wit a terrific team energizer, assist maker, and defensive force. She has expressed that's what she likes doing.

Aubrey too (4th year at UConn 3rd playing) is playing like who she has been, a heck of a defensive force, great under the basket, great at drives to the basket, and in general a force for making things happen. If Geno and staff haven't made either of them better shooters by this point, either it's not in them to reach that level, or the coaching staff has somehow failed to get them there. I vote strongly for the former!

Let's see how this plays out against Georgetown and exchange afterwards.

 

[freshler40]

I see tremendous improvement in Ines' game already. I'm not convinced she'll contribute on a regular basis or even next year (with two excellent guards coming in and Paige returning) but in the few months she's been at UConn she's steadily improved. Amari is a different story IMO. I really hoped by this time she'd found her rhythm and contributed meaningful minutes off the bench. That has not happened. Defensively, she is more often than not out of position and oftentimes seems confused with defensive rotations. She reacts instead of anticipating and that makes her late. Smaller players regularly rip rebounds from her hands. Offensively, she is timid and unsure of herself. She passes the ball well (which is her strength) but is otherwise ineffective. It's only one example but in the St. Johns' game she missed a wide-open layup. Yes, it's just one example but she's got to earn Geno's trust and missing easy opportunities such as that is not going to accomplish that. I know it takes post players a lot longer to develop I just hope she puts the work in and sticks around to find success. She has a tremendous personality and I really like her but it seems that she's running out of time.

Amari is well into her second year. Recent games have seen her have more minutes and being more productive, especially on defense. Her quickness has improved on switches and the opponents' mis-judge her ability to block their shots. The smaller team's height wise in this league aren't playing against her length in practice. Amari appears to have brought into what she needs to do to get more playing time and be a success on this team. A switch has turned on in January.

Ines is still an unknown IMO. She has had the benefit of lots of early court time, and also from being around great talent and prime time coaching. This has advanced her development well into that of a second-year player. She has built-in quickness and is a determined study. She, being a point guard has a lot more responsibility on court than most players. We'll see how it works out, but I like the bones of both players.

 

[vtcwbuff]

Tina had a bad shoulder early in her career. Does anyone remember if it was surgically repaired?

She had surgery following her 2nd year.

 

[vtcwbuff]

I don't understand why some posters are disappointed in Griffin's scoring. She's averaging 13 ppg on 60% shooting.

Tough crowd.

 

[NY Fan]

@hoophuskee - Re "...we're in a good place..." today's Georgetown game demonstrates how fleeting that can be. I sure hope Azzi's sitting out the the rest of the game was only precautionary, and she'll be ready for Seton Hall. When Lou looked as if she had sprained her ankle, that was a concerning few moments. As another poster observed, you can't have core players averaging close to 40 minutes per game and not risk tired legs leading to injury.

@LwrcasefaN - Re your post, " With all the injuries, both probably got more minutes in 16 games than they would have without the injuries to other players. The reality is the better the program the deeper the bench can become. Just stay ready...so you don't have to get ready." I would be grateful for some amplification. Given we've had and continue to have injury issues, sure they've played more than they would have sans those issues. Are you advocating that under these circumstances they should get more time during blowout games or not? That's where I am confused.

Team Chemistry: A case can be made that today's game validates posters who argued for more playing time for the core. I respectfully disagree and quote the GOAT who said in the half-time interview that "...nobody showed up..." Also, given the great chemistry of the St. John's game a couple of days ago, an equally likely if not more probable explanation is the team simply had an off day. They are allowed!

Going back to my original post in this thread, today's game demonstrated we could need Ines this season on very short notice, and an investment in more playing time during blowout games could yield significant upside returns.

 

[LwrcasefaN]

@hoophuskee - Re "...we're in a good place..." today's Georgetown game demonstrates how fleeting that can be. I sure hope Azzi's sitting out the the rest of the game was only precautionary, and she'll be ready for Seton Hall. When Lou looked as if she had sprained her ankle, that was a concerning few moments. As another poster observed, you can't have core players averaging close to 40 minutes per game and not risk tired legs leading to injury.

@LwrcasefaN - Re your post, " With all the injuries, both probably got more minutes in 16 games than they would have without the injuries to other players. The reality is the better the program the deeper the bench can become. Just stay ready...so you don't have to get ready." I would be grateful for some amplification. Given we've had and continue to have injury issues, sure they've played more than they would have sans those issues. Are you advocating that under these circumstances they should get more time during blowout games or not? That's where I am confused.

Team Chemistry: A case can be made that today's game validates posters who argued for more playing time for the core. I respectfully disagree and quote the GOAT who said in the half-time interview that "...nobody showed up..." Also, given the great chemistry of the St. John's game a couple of days ago, an equally likely if not more probable explanation is the team simply had an off day. They are allowed!

Going back to my original post in this thread, today's game demonstrated we could need Ines this season on very short notice, and an investment in more playing time during blowout games could yield significant upside returns.

I think the team would benefit more if the core played extended minutes. I hear you on the injury front, but Amari, IMO isn't going to move the needle much for the team. Not this year anyway. Ines I could see giving minutes for ball handling and so she can get comfortable shooting. Teams aren't overly concerned with closely guarding UCONN shooters...other than Lou...Azzi and Caroline when they're healthy. But the core still has work to do. I know they have blown teams out, but in the process some things still need work. What does this team look like pressing? My sense is that they will ultimately have to play the core a lot of minutes for the rest of the season. May as well get them use to it. All teams deal with injured players, but UCONN injuries feel like the chronic type.

 

[oldhusky]

Geno has made a career out of short rotations, 5+1 or 5+2, and it's really worked for him. It may not be possible for him to change this now, either because he understands something better than we do, or because he is set in his ways. However, this year UConn will come up against SC's much deeper rotation and either 1) we'll beat them because our 5+2 is simply a more efficient group, or 2) we'll get worn down by all of Dawn's substitutions. Could scenario #2 change his mind, given the likelihood of meeting SC again in the tournament?

I do think Geno needs another motivation to deviate from his short rotation norm. Whether that is fear of being worn down by deeper teams I don't know. You could also turn that around as an aggressive strategy, if we used our bench a great deal, where we could be the team wearing out the other team's starters and perhaps forcing them to use their much weaker bench players against our strong one.

We are not healthy enough to even consider that option currently, but have had several seasons where going into the season, a 10 player rotation, pressing and fast breaking for much of the game was a viable option, and could be done with all very highly capable players, not players at the level of Ines or Amari.

Geno's aversion to a long rotation has good points and bad points, but it clearly takes some of those strategic options off the table. You can't play at a super fast pace and press often without using a deep bench. Most coaches don't go to 10, often because the #6 or #7 player is way better than #9 or #10. Once Paige and Ice were out, that applied to us as well, but if everyone had been healthy, we looked to be a very talented top 10, with every one of those players being above average compared to most Division 1 teams.

This year he has no choice, but next year he presumably will, as he has for several years when he steered clear of it even when he had the opportunity. I have generally liked the press when we have used it, and I think we have seen a substantial increase in pace mostly a result of turning the offense over to Nika who pushes the ball up the floor way more than our other guards, and the return of Aubrey and more use of Ayanna in the future should help that too.

Maybe if we tried it more it wouldn't work, but while I understand this year, I think we have the pieces in place next year to press, run, and use a full 10 player rotation, where we are the team wearing out the other team's stars, and then dominating their bench even more than our starters do against their starters. At a minimum try it a little in the games that are not in doubt, and if it succeeds at least put it in your toolbox you take to every game, as an option to use as needed.

Anyway that is more of a next year debate, and of course one of the all time favorites here on the Boneyard, but just one final point. If you do have say a 10 player rotation that gets used to each other, an injury or two is much more easily dealt with. You can shorten to 9 or 8 without throwing somebody new into the mix that is not used to playing with the other healthy players. It is a relatively easy transition. If your rotation is 6 or 7, every injury involves major minute management and throwing inexperienced players into positions out of their comfort zone.

 

[NY Fan]

I do think Geno needs another motivation to deviate from his short rotation norm. Whether that is fear of being worn down by deeper teams I don't know. You could also turn that around as an aggressive strategy, if we used our bench a great deal, where we could be the team wearing out the other team's starters and perhaps forcing them to use their much weaker bench players against our strong one.

We are not healthy enough to even consider that option currently, but have had several seasons where going into the season, a 10 player rotation, pressing and fast breaking for much of the game was a viable option, and could be done with all very highly capable players, not players at the level of Ines or Amari.

Geno's aversion to a long rotation has good points and bad points, but it clearly takes some of those strategic options off the table. You can't play at a super fast pace and press often without using a deep bench. Most coaches don't go to 10, often because the #6 or #7 player is way better than #9 or #10. Once Paige and Ice were out, that applied to us as well, but if everyone had been healthy, we looked to be a very talented top 10, with every one of those players being above average compared to most Division 1 teams.

This year he has no choice, but next year he presumably will, as he has for several years when he steered clear of it even when he had the opportunity. I have generally liked the press when we have used it, and I think we have seen a substantial increase in pace mostly a result of turning the offense over to Nika who pushes the ball up the floor way more than our other guards, and the return of Aubrey and more use of Ayanna in the future should help that too.

Maybe if we tried it more it wouldn't work, but while I understand this year, I think we have the pieces in place next year to press, run, and use a full 10 player rotation, where we are the team wearing out the other team's stars, and then dominating their bench even more than our starters do against their starters. At a minimum try it a little in the games that are not in doubt, and if it succeeds at least put it in your toolbox you take to every game, as an option to use as needed.

Anyway that is more of a next year debate, and of course one of the all time favorites here on the Boneyard, but just one final point. If you do have say a 10 player rotation that gets used to each other, an injury or two is much more easily dealt with. You can shorten to 9 or 8 without throwing somebody new into the mix that is not used to playing with the other healthy players. It is a relatively easy transition. If your rotation is 6 or 7, every injury involves major minute management and throwing inexperienced players into positions out of their comfort zone.

If not replying, I'd give your post a "Like." My original post was in the context of this year's team and health issues, hence the need to prepare backup alternatives as much as possible. And as Geno said in the post game, "...we have to give these guys (the core) a rest..." Respectfully, I read the most part of your post refers to a more idealized and next year circumstances, not the current one.

BTW - Today's off day could also reflect how many minutes the core has played. I wonder if turnovers might drop with more players having in-game breathers. I believe Nika has essentially played nearly 40 minutes in every game she's played.

 

[hookshot]

I don't understand why some posters are disappointed in Griffin's scoring. She's averaging 13 ppg on 60% shooting.

Tough crowd.

her scoring is great but is based on hustle, layups, put-backs; shooting is something she has lost or never had confidence in

 

[hoophuskee]

@hoophuskee - Re "...we're in a good place..." today's Georgetown game demonstrates how fleeting that can be. I sure hope Azzi's sitting out the the rest of the game was only precautionary, and she'll be ready for Seton Hall. When Lou looked as if she had sprained her ankle, that was a concerning few moments. As another poster observed, you can't have core players averaging close to 40 minutes per game and not risk tired legs leading to injury.

@LwrcasefaN - Re your post, " With all the injuries, both probably got more minutes in 16 games than they would have without the injuries to other players. The reality is the better the program the deeper the bench can become. Just stay ready...so you don't have to get ready." I would be grateful for some amplification. Given we've had and continue to have injury issues, sure they've played more than they would have sans those issues. Are you advocating that under these circumstances they should get more time during blowout games or not? That's where I am confused.

Team Chemistry: A case can be made that today's game validates posters who argued for more playing time for the core. I respectfully disagree and quote the GOAT who said in the half-time interview that "...nobody showed up..." Also, given the great chemistry of the St. John's game a couple of days ago, an equally likely if not more probable explanation is the team simply had an off day. They are allowed!

Going back to my original post in this thread, today's game demonstrated we could need Ines this season on very short notice, and an investment in more playing time during blowout games could yield significant upside returns.

I just read your 1st para and had to stop.

First off you are exaggerating about averaging 40 minutes. Let's stop with the extreme exaggeration. Which players are averaging near 40 minutes per game? Please cite the players that are averaging 40 minutes a game this year or why bother to send me extreme exaggerations from other posters? I hope you aren’t so intent on trying to “win” a conversation rather than discuss ‘Bench’ vs “Core?”

Muhl was averaging the most 34.8. Please cite how minutes have caused her injury.

Second, please advise what Azzi’s’s injury has to do with "minutes." She initially hurt herself in a play in which Edwards crashed into her knee vs ND. That had nothing to do with minutes. Then she hurts herself 12 minutes into this game. If all of this has nothing to do with minutes then why in the same para are you mentioning 40 minute averages and putting Azzi in the same grouping as if they are related? IF they are related. then please explain.-- She played 20 minutes the game before. So please explain how this injury has a thing to do with "minutes?" Why are you lumping “40 minutes” and "Azzi" in the same para?

As far as Lou, she has played more minutes at UCONN than she has at Fairfield?

If there are exaggerations I don’t care to participate. What is also “fleeting” are things such as “wins and losses’ and getting to consecutive Final Fours etc.

 

[Urshurak]

Lots of calls in the chat to put in Ines and Amari and Piath and Mir…….

Ines came in and immediately traveled then on the next possession threw the ball wildly into the stands, not a UConn player with 15 feet. I think she is marginally better than B Palido (what a fun shot she made in the NC game against Syracuse) but not much more. Haven’t seen it anyway.

Amari wasn’t much better today but has had some decent minutes in past games, but inconsistent is being nice.

I don’t see how either of these two players, especially Ines, are realistically moving the needle under any circumstances. Georgetown went on a 9-0 run to end the game tonight and all UConn got was turnover after turnover with these two in the game.

Sorry, just don’t get it at all.

 

[HuskyNan]

If not replying, I'd give your post a "Like." My original post was in the context of this year's team and health issues, hence the need to prepare backup alternatives as much as possible. And as Geno said in the post game, "...we have to give these guys (the core) a rest..." Respectfully, I read the most part of your post refers to a more idealized and next year circumstances, not the current one.

BTW - Today's off day could also reflect how many minutes the core has played. I wonder if turnovers might drop with more players having in-game breathers. I believe Nika has essentially played nearly 40 minutes in every game she's played.

You can like a post and reply to it as well.

 

[HuskyNan]

Geno talks about the rotation near the end of the Georgetown postgame presser

 

[Mdoggie]

Lots of calls in the chat to put in Ines and Amari and Piath and Mir…….
@Urshurak in typical boneyard fashion BYers alway call for playing time for players who don’t get much and miss and love every player that leaves the program. BYers are the most loving fans in the history of college sports lol.

 

[luminosity]

Lots of calls in the chat to put in Ines and Amari and Piath and Mir…….

Ines came in and immediately traveled then on the next possession threw the ball wildly into the stands, not a UConn player with 15 feet. I think she is marginally better than B Palido (what a fun shot she made in the NC game against Syracuse) but not much more. Haven’t seen it anyway.

Amari wasn’t much better today but has had some decent minutes in past games, but inconsistent is being nice.

I don’t see how either of these two players, especially Ines, are realistically moving the needle under any circumstances. Georgetown went on a 9-0 run to end the game tonight and all UConn got was turnover after turnover with these two in the game.

Sorry, just don’t get it at all.

I think some have this utopian scenario stuck in their head that UCONN should always be ten plus deep and that everyone on the team should be able to come in and contribute right away or should be given minutes at all times to help develop into that type of player. Of course, this is unrealistic for a couple reasons. 1. You rarely see that across team sports. Benchwarmers will always exist and 2. Rotations shorten in the tournament and Geno, if anything, is always preparing for tournament play.

Ines and Amari both seem like great people and the team clearly loves them but...realistic expectations need to be given to them. Ines is a freshman who was gonna go to juco because Geno came calling and didn't practice with the team during the summer. Amari has had two years now and has had marginal improvement. Their minutes and their usage are, right now, justified. If either one shows rapid improvement, then they will play more. It's as easy as that.

 

[bbfanLA]

I agree that Ines is already looking like a competent player, with upside. She can certainly be counted on to provide quality minutes at the point, when needed. With both Nika and Azzi healthy, that need is somewhat diminished. Next season will be an even greater challenge, if Paige is healthy, Azzi and Nika are healthy and KK has joined the competition. In other words, Ines is going to have to improve exponentially to earn any time at all. And, sadly, she might become candidate to relocate. But she is already an asset for this season. As for Amari, it is hard to believe she was such a highly regarded recruit. I have been a major supporter for her, but she really produces little. Yes, she can stand at the top of the key and see cutters and get the ball to them. And, from time to time, can block a shot under or near the basket. But she has poor ball control and has lost all confidence in shooting. By poor ball control, I mean she has weak or" bad" hands. Her rebounding is accidental not earned. I keep hoping to see more value and maybe the coaches do as well. She did get some nice exposure vs. St. Johns. But had little to show for it. A missed lay up is just not acceptable for offense. So, her opportunity window will close quickly when Ice Brady shows up; not to mention the center from Egypt. I am reminded that Tina Charles did not emerge until her junior year. But I think she showed more, early, than Amari has. Anyone remember?

Tina won the USBWA national freshman of the year award and was a third team all-American her sophomore year.

 

[NY Fan]

I just read your 1st para and had to stop.

First off you are exaggerating about averaging 40 minutes. Let's stop with the extreme exaggeration. Which players are averaging near 40 minutes per game? Please cite the players that are averaging 40 minutes a game this year or why bother to send me extreme exaggerations from other posters? I hope you aren’t so intent on trying to “win” a conversation rather than discuss ‘Bench’ vs “Core?”

Muhl was averaging the most 34.8. Please cite how minutes have caused her injury.

Second, please advise what Azzi’s’s injury has to do with "minutes." She initially hurt herself in a play in which Edwards crashed into her knee vs ND. That had nothing to do with minutes. Then she hurts herself 12 minutes into this game. If all of this has nothing to do with minutes then why in the same para are you mentioning 40 minute averages and putting Azzi in the same grouping as if they are related? IF they are related. then please explain.-- She played 20 minutes the game before. So please explain how this injury has a thing to do with "minutes?" Why are you lumping “40 minutes” and "Azzi" in the same para?

As far as Lou, she has played more minutes at UCONN than she has at Fairfield?

If there are exaggerations I don’t care to participate. What is also “fleeting” are things such as “wins and losses’ and getting to consecutive Final Fours etc.

For accuracy sake, my first para used "close to 40 minutes" not "40 minutes". Part of the benefit of my outrageous Spectrum subscription is to hear Kara Walters who has been saying virtually the same thing about playing time in general. The game announcers expressed the same sentiment. And no, I'm not trying to win a conversation but to have one.

Re Nika: Again I said she has played "nearly 40 minutes" and wondered if this might be impacting her # of turnovers. No mention of injury. BTW - Is it wrong to wonder if players get tired playing nearly 40 minutes and might be less effective and prone to errors?

Re Azzi: Respectfully, I mentioned Azzi in the first paragraph which said nothing about playing time. It emphasized how "fleeting" being in a good place can be a la Paige last year in the final minute of the ND game or this year's injury. I sure as heck hope Azzi's injury is not serious, and as for Lou, a couple of times announcers referred to her in a couple of games as perhaps having hurt or ankle today and foot in a previous game. Please don't ask me to cite the exact time that was mentioned, but imagine injuries to both and its impact on the team and season. Given the way the season has been going, is that too far fetched?

Re your reference to Lou "As far as Lou, she has played more minutes at UCONN than she has at Fairfield?": Honestly, I don't know if it's a statement or a question. If it's a statement, I accept it. If a question, I don't have the answer.

hoophuskee, by asking what appear to me logical questions, my intent is not to antagonize or incur wrath. I'm just a fan, admittedly as passionate about UConn WBB as you and others on the Boneyard. I respect and understand the other side of the core vs bench case.

 

[freshler40]

Amari is well into her second year. Recent games have seen her have more minutes and being more productive, especially on defense. Her quickness has improved on switches and the opponents' mis-judge her ability to block their shots. The smaller team's height wise in this league aren't playing against her length in practice. Amari appears to have brought into what she needs to do to get more playing time and be a success on this team. A switch has turned on in January.

Ines is still an unknown IMO. She has had the benefit of lots of early court time, and also from being around great talent and prime time coaching. This has advanced her development well into that of a second-year player. She has built-in quickness and is a determined study. She, being a point guard has a lot more responsibility on court than most players. We'll see how it works out, but I like the bones of both players.

There seemed to be a regression of progress in the Georgetown game Sunday evening for both players. Too much standing around and reaching in fouls by Amari, lack of quickness and not knowing where to be on the court. This was strange at this point in the season. Geno even pulled her after two quick fouls.

 

[Hist-teacher]

There seemed to be a regression of progress in the Georgetown game Sunday evening for both players. Too much standing around and reaching in fouls by Amari, lack of quickness and not knowing where to be on the court. This was strange at this point in the season. Geno even pulled her after two quick fouls.

I couldn't agree more and said as such in an earlier post on this thread. She's like a "deer in the headlights" out there. Just play. When you're given an opportunity to play do so with some motivation and energy, even some emotion. You can't always control a lot in this game but you can certainly control attitude, energy and effort.

 

[HuskyNan]

There seemed to be a regression of progress in the Georgetown game Sunday evening for both players. Too much standing around and reaching in fouls by Amari, lack of quickness and not knowing where to be on the court. This was strange at this point in the season. Geno even pulled her after two quick fouls.

They aren’t the only ones. The whole team was dragging

 

[Urshurak]

They aren’t the only ones. The whole team was dragging

Agree. Just a bad day. Wishing Azzi hadn’t gotten hurt because we all just want to turn the page on this one.

 

[Urshurak]

I think some have this utopian scenario stuck in their head that UCONN should always be ten plus deep and that everyone on the team should be able to come in and contribute right away or should be given minutes at all times to help develop into that type of player. Of course, this is unrealistic for a couple reasons. 1. You rarely see that across team sports. Benchwarmers will always exist and 2. Rotations shorten in the tournament and Geno, if anything, is always preparing for tournament play.

Ines and Amari both seem like great people and the team clearly loves them but...realistic expectations need to be given to them. Ines is a freshman who was gonna go to juco because Geno came calling and didn't practice with the team during the summer. Amari has had two years now and has had marginal improvement. Their minutes and their usage are, right now, justified. If either one shows rapid improvement, then they will play more. It's as easy as that.

Part of the issue is you have some fantastic player here, best in the country. So, if you have more good players behind them, they want to play, so they tend to transfer. What’s left? Players with less skill, maybe not even average. I think that’s what happens at UConn. That’s why bench is not really ever very deep.

 

[Wessex]

Hello, @NY Fan: I'm here as an Internet middleman (woman, actually) for my 95-year-old father, a UConn fan who doesn't use a computer. The reason he's followed UConn for decades is the excellence of the program and Geno, yet every year he raises highly analytical questions—privately—about all sorts of coaching decisions. He does so only because he wants the women to win, not because he fails to realize that the team has an astonishing record of doing just that. I suspect he'd find your discussion both substantive and respectful. I know I do. Welcome!

 

[NY Fan]

Hello, @NY Fan: I'm here as an Internet middleman (woman, actually) for my 95-year-old father, a UConn fan who doesn't use a computer. The reason he's followed UConn for decades is the excellence of the program and Geno, yet every year he raises highly analytical questions—privately—about all sorts of coaching decisions. He does so only because he wants the women to win, not because he fails to realize that the team has an astonishing record of doing just that. I suspect he'd find your discussion both substantive and respectful. I know I do. Welcome!

Thank you, I'd welcome it as well.