Is UConn's Rebounding Good Enough For an NC?

[JoePgh]

This thread is really a reaction to a post in the "DePaul Loses Big" thread. In Post #61 in that thread, a certain poster who is well-known for constant negative commentary expressed the opinion that defense and rebounding are the key to winning national championships (citing Pat Summitt on that subject), and that both Stanford and South Carolina have both of these capabilities at a "much higher level" than UConn. That comment and that issue didn't really belong in a thread about DePaul's loss to Dayton, so I am starting this new thread to focus on it.

There is a certain plausibility to his opinion, at least with respect to rebounding (I don't think his opinion is at all plausible with respect to defense). I would agree to this extent: if UConn does not win the NC this year, it will be because its rebounding was inferior to that of some opponent, most likely one of the two who were named. If UConn can play those teams and hold its own on the boards, then UConn should win because all other aspects of its game are superior to those of the opponent: shooting, playmaking, passing, and depth of talent on the roster. Regarding the latter, no other team including the Gamecocks has players of the quality of Evina, Dorka, Caroline, and Nika coming off the bench. That depth means that UConn should be able to play more aggressively and worry less about fouls than either of its two main competitors.

But can UConn rebound adequately against South Carolina or Stanford? It is very difficult to get objective evidence about this. If someone like me, who believes the answer is "Yes", cites UConn's recent rebounding success against Big East teams, that evidence will be dismissed because it is, after all, the Big East -- supposedly a powderpuff conference against whom one's grandmother could rebound successfully. If someone who believes the answer is "No" cites evidence from UConn's losses this year, especially against South Carolina in the Bahamas, that evidence can be dismissed as not representative of the current team and the obvious improvements in the play of Aaliyah and Dorka, and the emergence of Caroline, since that game.

So really, the only evidence that withstands both dismissals comes from a single game: UConn vs. Tennessee on February 6. That game is not against a Big East opponent; in fact, it was against a team which, at the time, had the best rebounding margin in the nation. Here are some key rebounding statistics from that game:

• Total rebounds were tied 38-38;
• Offensive rebounds for the game favored TN by 13-10, but in the first half, UConn led in O-bounds by a margin of 10-3 at one point.
• Tennessee missed 42 FGA's and rebounded 13 of those misses (31%), while UConn missed just 32 FGA's and rebounded 10 of those (also 31%). In other words, offensive rebounding efficiency was the same for both teams, and TN's higher total simply reflected more missed shots.
• Second-chance points, which are a key indicator of how much damage the opponent's control of the boards is doing, were 12-8 in TN's favor. That 4-point margin was obviously not a decisive factor in the game's outcome, but you could argue that it might be crucial in a closer game.
• Points in the paint favored TN by 20-12 (totals which clearly overlap with the second-chance point totals), but again, that did not have a major effect in a game that UConn won by 19 (and led by 25 when the benches were cleared with about a minute left to play).
• In individual play, Tamari Key scored 8 points with 1 block, and got all of 3 (!) rebounds in 28 minutes, while Liv got 6 points with 3 rebounds and 3 blocks. Pretty even, in other words. At the "4" position, Dye/Darby got 1 point and 5 rebounds compared to AE/Dorka getting 14 points and 11 rebounds. To my heavily biased eye test, Aaliyah dominated the boards in that game and was called for only 3 fouls.

Overall, these statistics lead me to the conclusion that UConn was approximately equal to TN on the boards or perhaps very slightly inferior, but not nearly inferior enough to overcome UConn's advantage in the other aspects of the game. Tennessee did not have 3-point shooters to worry UConn's defense, and its offense consisted almost entirely of 1-on-1 play by Horston and Burrell, rather than any serious ball movement. Even a 19-11 TN advantage in made free throws was insufficient to overcome these deficiencies.

If UConn's rebounding performance against Stanford and/or South Carolina approximates what it did against Tennessee, UConn should win both games, possibly by double digits. To beat UConn, those teams will have to either dominate the boards more than Tennessee could, or match UConn's "first shot" offensive efficiency. I think either of those roads to victory will be difficult for both of those teams.

 

[eebmg]

No real opinion on the team as a whole bit Dorka at OSU had 11 rebounds a game. I am a bit surprised her minutes adjusted numbers on rebounding haven't been similar although I understand we have alot of good rebounders in general eating but all I can say is it's in her.

 

[BobbyJ]

This thread is really a reaction to a post in the "DePaul Loses Big" thread. In Post #61 in that thread, a certain poster who is well-known for constant negative commentary expressed the opinion that defense and rebounding are the key to winning national championships (citing Pat Summitt on that subject), and that both Stanford and South Carolina have both of these capabilities at a "much higher level" than UConn. That comment and that issue didn't really belong in a thread about DePaul's loss to Dayton, so I am starting this new thread to focus on it.

There is a certain plausibility to his opinion, at least with respect to rebounding (I don't think his opinion is at all plausible with respect to defense). I would agree to this extent: if UConn does not win the NC this year, it will be because its rebounding was inferior to that of some opponent, most likely one of the two who were named. If UConn can play those teams and hold its own on the boards, then UConn should win because all other aspects of its game are superior to those of the opponent: shooting, playmaking, passing, and depth of talent on the roster. Regarding the latter, no other team including the Gamecocks has players of the quality of Evina, Dorka, Caroline, and Nika coming off the bench. That depth means that UConn should be able to play more aggressively and worry less about fouls than either of its two main competitors.

But can UConn rebound adequately against South Carolina or Stanford? It is very difficult to get objective evidence about this. If someone like me, who believes the answer is "Yes", cites UConn's recent rebounding success against Big East teams, that evidence will be dismissed because it is, after all, the Big East -- supposedly a powderpuff conference against whom one's grandmother could rebound successfully. If someone who believes the answer is "No" cites evidence from UConn's losses this year, especially against South Carolina in the Bahamas, that evidence can be dismissed as not representative of the current team and the obvious improvements in the play of Aaliyah and Dorka, and the emergence of Caroline, since that game.

So really, the only evidence that withstands both dismissals comes from a single game: UConn vs. Tennessee on February 6. That game is not against a Big East opponent; in fact, it was against a team which, at the time, had the best rebounding margin in the nation. Here are some key rebounding statistics from that game:

• Total rebounds were tied 38-38;
• Offensive rebounds for the game favored TN by 13-10, but in the first half, UConn led in O-bounds by a margin of 10-3 at one point.
• Tennessee missed 42 FGA's and rebounded 13 of those misses (31%), while UConn missed just 32 FGA's and rebounded 10 of those (also 31%). In other words, offensive rebounding efficiency was the same for both teams, and TN's higher total simply reflected more missed shots.
• Second-chance points, which are a key indicator of how much damage the opponent's control of the boards is doing, were 12-8 in TN's favor. That 4-point margin was obviously not a decisive factor in the game's outcome, but you could argue that it might be crucial in a closer game.
• Points in the paint favored TN by 20-12 (totals which clearly overlap with the second-chance point totals), but again, that did not have a major effect in a game that UConn won by 19 (and led by 25 when the benches were cleared with about a minute left to play).
• In individual play, Tamari Key scored 8 points with 1 block, and got all of 3 (!) rebounds in 28 minutes, while Liv got 6 points with 3 rebounds and 3 blocks. Pretty even, in other words. At the "4" position, Dye/Darby got 1 point and 5 rebounds compared to AE/Dorka getting 14 points and 11 rebounds. To my heavily biased eye test, Aaliyah dominated the boards in that game and was called for only 3 fouls.

Overall, these statistics lead me to the conclusion that UConn was approximately equal to TN on the boards or perhaps very slightly inferior, but not nearly inferior enough to overcome UConn's advantage in the other aspects of the game. Tennessee did not have 3-point shooters to worry UConn's defense, and its offense consisted almost entirely of 1-on-1 play by Horston and Burrell, rather than any serious ball movement. Even a 19-11 TN advantage in made free throws was insufficient to overcome these deficiencies.

If UConn's rebounding performance against Stanford and/or South Carolina approximates what it did against Tennessee, UConn should win both games, possibly by double digits. To beat UConn, those teams will have to either dominate the boards more than Tennessee could, or match UConn's "first shot" offensive efficiency. I think either of those roads to victory will be difficult for both of those teams.

If UConn loses in the tourney, I don’t believe it will be because of rebounding or their defense. IMO, it will be for the same reason they lost to AZ. last year and SC this year. Their inability to run efficient offense and get enough quality shots against physical, pressure half court defense.

 

[visitingcock]

You say that no other team, including South Carolina, has bench quality Bigs like UConn.

Cardosa,Amihere, LeLe and Feagan. Your bench tops that in the paint?

Stick with comparing depth at guard where you win.

 

[Charliebball]

Hopefully I'll let you know by around 10 pm on April third...........

 

[Cuango]

You say that no other team, including South Carolina, has bench quality Bigs like UConn.

Cardosa,Amihere, LeLe and Feagan. Your bench tops that in the paint?

Stick with comparing depth at guard where you win.

I may be missing it, as I am old, but I’m not seeing where the OP stated that UConn’s has better bench quality bigs than SCAnd Stanford? Clearly we don’t have an edge there but I just can’t find where JoePgh made that statement?

 

[JellyBean]

Yes. UConn's defense and rebounding is good enough to win a National Championship.

 

[jchusky]

Don't understand what was negative about being objective.
So you're saying South Carolina and Stanford don't have an advantage defensively? Sometimes it is ok to give credit to other teams, does not mean you were "hating" or being "negative" to a team. BPI also agrees and they have dog in the fight. They have SC and Stanford by far the favorites to win the ntl title.

 

[UConnCat]

Back when UConn used to beat Tennessee in Final Fours the Vols would typically out-rebound UConn.

 

[JonathanXIV]

You say that no other team, including South Carolina, has bench quality Bigs like UConn.

Cardosa,Amihere, LeLe and Feagan. Your bench tops that in the paint?

Stick with comparing depth at guard where you win.

I read the post as depth of the roster, not confined to the paint. Don’t think he was looking to diss anyone. It’s an opinion.

 

[cockhrnleghrn]

If you have an elite defensive and rebounding team, you have a chance in any game even when your offense is sputtering.

 

[EricLA]

This thread is really a reaction to a post in the "DePaul Loses Big" thread. In Post #61 in that thread, a certain poster who is well-known for constant negative commentary expressed the opinion that defense and rebounding are the key to winning national championships (citing Pat Summitt on that subject), and that both Stanford and South Carolina have both of these capabilities at a "much higher level" than UConn. That comment and that issue didn't really belong in a thread about DePaul's loss to Dayton, so I am starting this new thread to focus on it.

There is a certain plausibility to his opinion, at least with respect to rebounding (I don't think his opinion is at all plausible with respect to defense). I would agree to this extent: if UConn does not win the NC this year, it will be because its rebounding was inferior to that of some opponent, most likely one of the two who were named. If UConn can play those teams and hold its own on the boards, then UConn should win because all other aspects of its game are superior to those of the opponent: shooting, playmaking, passing, and depth of talent on the roster. Regarding the latter, no other team including the Gamecocks has players of the quality of Evina, Dorka, Caroline, and Nika coming off the bench. That depth means that UConn should be able to play more aggressively and worry less about fouls than either of its two main competitors.

But can UConn rebound adequately against South Carolina or Stanford? It is very difficult to get objective evidence about this. If someone like me, who believes the answer is "Yes", cites UConn's recent rebounding success against Big East teams, that evidence will be dismissed because it is, after all, the Big East -- supposedly a powderpuff conference against whom one's grandmother could rebound successfully. If someone who believes the answer is "No" cites evidence from UConn's losses this year, especially against South Carolina in the Bahamas, that evidence can be dismissed as not representative of the current team and the obvious improvements in the play of Aaliyah and Dorka, and the emergence of Caroline, since that game.

So really, the only evidence that withstands both dismissals comes from a single game: UConn vs. Tennessee on February 6. That game is not against a Big East opponent; in fact, it was against a team which, at the time, had the best rebounding margin in the nation. Here are some key rebounding statistics from that game:

• Total rebounds were tied 38-38;
• Offensive rebounds for the game favored TN by 13-10, but in the first half, UConn led in O-bounds by a margin of 10-3 at one point.
• Tennessee missed 42 FGA's and rebounded 13 of those misses (31%), while UConn missed just 32 FGA's and rebounded 10 of those (also 31%). In other words, offensive rebounding efficiency was the same for both teams, and TN's higher total simply reflected more missed shots.
• Second-chance points, which are a key indicator of how much damage the opponent's control of the boards is doing, were 12-8 in TN's favor. That 4-point margin was obviously not a decisive factor in the game's outcome, but you could argue that it might be crucial in a closer game.
• Points in the paint favored TN by 20-12 (totals which clearly overlap with the second-chance point totals), but again, that did not have a major effect in a game that UConn won by 19 (and led by 25 when the benches were cleared with about a minute left to play).
• In individual play, Tamari Key scored 8 points with 1 block, and got all of 3 (!) rebounds in 28 minutes, while Liv got 6 points with 3 rebounds and 3 blocks. Pretty even, in other words. At the "4" position, Dye/Darby got 1 point and 5 rebounds compared to AE/Dorka getting 14 points and 11 rebounds. To my heavily biased eye test, Aaliyah dominated the boards in that game and was called for only 3 fouls.

Overall, these statistics lead me to the conclusion that UConn was approximately equal to TN on the boards or perhaps very slightly inferior, but not nearly inferior enough to overcome UConn's advantage in the other aspects of the game. Tennessee did not have 3-point shooters to worry UConn's defense, and its offense consisted almost entirely of 1-on-1 play by Horston and Burrell, rather than any serious ball movement. Even a 19-11 TN advantage in made free throws was insufficient to overcome these deficiencies.

If UConn's rebounding performance against Stanford and/or South Carolina approximates what it did against Tennessee, UConn should win both games, possibly by double digits. To beat UConn, those teams will have to either dominate the boards more than Tennessee could, or match UConn's "first shot" offensive efficiency. I think either of those roads to victory will be difficult for both of those teams.

Your post reminded me of the Philosophy course I took in college. A lot of "If A > B and B > C, then A > C."

But the reality is that "on any given day". I say it that way because if 2 or 3 UCONN players have an off shooting night (Azzi, Paige, Christyn for example), our shooting advantage is gone, and probably our guard advantage as well, since opposing teams can play zone and pack it in, making the game a total grind.

IMHO this UCONN team has the talent to win it all. However, while the players we have had available this season (sans Aubrey) are now supposedly 100% healthy (Geno mentioned the mental side as still an issue), we have not seen the team put together a complete 40 minute tight effort, never mind a 30 minute, or even 25 minute, effort.

So this team is like a box of chocolates. Lack of consistency, easily explained IMHO by the revolving door of injuries and illnesses this season. We finally got all the players back late in the season just before senior day, but even the BET was not a seamless display of solid team chemistry.

So what team will we see in the early rounds? The middle rounds? The late rounds should we advance? IMHO I do expect our improvement to be greater than pretty much any other team out there - mainly because we were missing so many important parts, and we got them all back late in the season. No other team had that situation.

So if we are playing up to the potential that we all know is possible, this team has a great shot. But there are a LOT of unanswered questions at this time. Too soon to speculate how good we could be, or how we will match up (for me)...

 

[BlueSkyGLW]

No real opinion on the team as a whole bit Dorka at OSU had 11 rebounds a game. I am a bit surprised her minutes adjusted numbers on rebounding haven't been similar although I understand we have alot of good rebounders in general eating but all I can say is it's in her.

View attachment 74571

Take a look at her minutes in the high post if you can - assuming there is a way. That should reduce her rebounding numbers but it also showcases her passing ability.....and seems to be beginning to restore her confidence in her outside shot.

 

[RSHERMVIKES]

On the Brackets Preview Show Rebecca Lobo said "People better not sleep on UCONN as Geno has that old gleam in his eyes like he had several years ago!" He really likes this team!

 

[Happydad745]

I hope UConn gets the opportunity to find out.....

 

[TeamFirst!]

The main advantages Uconn has now is depth and scoring. If you just go by season team statistics, NC State looks better but where would we have been statistically if we didn't get hammered with injuries this year? I think we have an edge but it's no cakewalk. We may have to beat the top 3 teams in the country to win this. That's a tough path to victory.

The big question is when we led South Carolina for 3 quarters, was the 4th quarter collapse from player fatigue? I would give that a probable. We need to play our bench.

 

[jchusky]

The main advantages Uconn has now is depth and scoring. If you just go by season team statistics, NC State looks better but where would we have been statistically if we didn't get hammered with injuries this year? I think we have an edge but it's no cakewalk. We may have to beat the top 3 teams in the country to win this. That's a tough path to victory.

The big question is when we led South Carolina for 3 quarters, was the 4th quarter collapse from player fatigue? I would give that a probable. We need to play our bench.

I don't understand this fatigue comment? SC also played 3 games in 3 days so does that mean they have more endurance and stamina than Uconn? Fatigue had nothing to do with the loss, they couldn't stop Boston and not sure they can still. Maybe if they double team her and let someone else beat them is worth a shot but again a hill to climb before that scenario if does happen for both teams. And for me when it comes to team with the most depth is still Stanford, they can put 8-9 players and the emergence of Kiki Iriafen has made them even tougher to play.

 

[BlueSkyGLW]

This thread is really a reaction to a post in the "DePaul Loses Big" thread. In Post #61 in that thread, a certain poster who is well-known for constant negative commentary expressed the opinion that defense and rebounding are the key to winning national championships (citing Pat Summitt on that subject), and that both Stanford and South Carolina have both of these capabilities at a "much higher level" than UConn. That comment and that issue didn't really belong in a thread about DePaul's loss to Dayton, so I am starting this new thread to focus on it.

There is a certain plausibility to his opinion, at least with respect to rebounding (I don't think his opinion is at all plausible with respect to defense). I would agree to this extent: if UConn does not win the NC this year, it will be because its rebounding was inferior to that of some opponent, most likely one of the two who were named. If UConn can play those teams and hold its own on the boards, then UConn should win because all other aspects of its game are superior to those of the opponent: shooting, playmaking, passing, and depth of talent on the roster. Regarding the latter, no other team including the Gamecocks has players of the quality of Evina, Dorka, Caroline, and Nika coming off the bench. That depth means that UConn should be able to play more aggressively and worry less about fouls than either of its two main competitors.

But can UConn rebound adequately against South Carolina or Stanford? It is very difficult to get objective evidence about this. If someone like me, who believes the answer is "Yes", cites UConn's recent rebounding success against Big East teams, that evidence will be dismissed because it is, after all, the Big East -- supposedly a powderpuff conference against whom one's grandmother could rebound successfully. If someone who believes the answer is "No" cites evidence from UConn's losses this year, especially against South Carolina in the Bahamas, that evidence can be dismissed as not representative of the current team and the obvious improvements in the play of Aaliyah and Dorka, and the emergence of Caroline, since that game.

So really, the only evidence that withstands both dismissals comes from a single game: UConn vs. Tennessee on February 6. That game is not against a Big East opponent; in fact, it was against a team which, at the time, had the best rebounding margin in the nation. Here are some key rebounding statistics from that game:

• Total rebounds were tied 38-38;
• Offensive rebounds for the game favored TN by 13-10, but in the first half, UConn led in O-bounds by a margin of 10-3 at one point.
• Tennessee missed 42 FGA's and rebounded 13 of those misses (31%), while UConn missed just 32 FGA's and rebounded 10 of those (also 31%). In other words, offensive rebounding efficiency was the same for both teams, and TN's higher total simply reflected more missed shots.
• Second-chance points, which are a key indicator of how much damage the opponent's control of the boards is doing, were 12-8 in TN's favor. That 4-point margin was obviously not a decisive factor in the game's outcome, but you could argue that it might be crucial in a closer game.
• Points in the paint favored TN by 20-12 (totals which clearly overlap with the second-chance point totals), but again, that did not have a major effect in a game that UConn won by 19 (and led by 25 when the benches were cleared with about a minute left to play).
• In individual play, Tamari Key scored 8 points with 1 block, and got all of 3 (!) rebounds in 28 minutes, while Liv got 6 points with 3 rebounds and 3 blocks. Pretty even, in other words. At the "4" position, Dye/Darby got 1 point and 5 rebounds compared to AE/Dorka getting 14 points and 11 rebounds. To my heavily biased eye test, Aaliyah dominated the boards in that game and was called for only 3 fouls.

Overall, these statistics lead me to the conclusion that UConn was approximately equal to TN on the boards or perhaps very slightly inferior, but not nearly inferior enough to overcome UConn's advantage in the other aspects of the game. Tennessee did not have 3-point shooters to worry UConn's defense, and its offense consisted almost entirely of 1-on-1 play by Horston and Burrell, rather than any serious ball movement. Even a 19-11 TN advantage in made free throws was insufficient to overcome these deficiencies.

If UConn's rebounding performance against Stanford and/or South Carolina approximates what it did against Tennessee, UConn should win both games, possibly by double digits. To beat UConn, those teams will have to either dominate the boards more than Tennessee could, or match UConn's "first shot" offensive efficiency. I think either of those roads to victory will be difficult for both of those teams.

Don't work too hard on using statistics for the season or its segments to assess the quality of play this will bring to its opponents henceforth. The question won't be properly answered because of the frequent variations of team composition and quality of opposition as those changes occurred.

Instead, there are some reliable indicators of what is possible:

• Each one, except Paige post-injury, has had to deliver a strong performance to help the team win. None were consistent as they navigated the changes in roles and pressure to perform.
• All of them except Paige again has had to learn to play well together as a team - painful to watch at times but they learned and became a well-coordinated team as they became healthy, if untested in extreme crucial moments because of overmatched opponents.
• Those were on the bench at various watched and learned about their teammates: each one's tendencies, their movements, speed, etc. Even though they were not on the floor with them, this helps them nonetheless in their read-and-react conditioning. This likely contributed to how their defensive performance improved regardless of the combination the Coach put on the floor.
• Each one on the team have had to dig deep under the crucible, testing their resolve. Indications are that this too has improved although we don't know the depth of the challenge they can overcome when the face much better teams.
• The performances the returners are capable of under fire was revealed after the Arkansas game last year until the reached the FF. As they became whole as a team late this season, all have shown they have improved - except the just recovered Paige. Olivia, Aaliyah, Christyn and Evina, especially Evina have certainly improved - the measure is not the quality of the opposition but in how they carry themselves and energetically deliver both defensively and offensively.
• The three newcomers have shown their qualities when they have had to deliver, turning UConn into a deep team.
• And, in her uneven return, Paige showed glimpse of Paige as we know her. The 10 or so days before they play the next game shall have helped her get to know everyone and hone their timing, in various player combinations.
• I would wager that the team have constantly talked to each other and probably have done some visualization exercises among themselves.
• When each one of them is playing well, they are either better than their counterparts in the other teams or not too far off the opponents level, so the strength of the collective in their depth should be superior.
• There is little danger that the team will have exhausted players by the FF so, unlike in the past few years, their physical resources should be undiminished playing through six more games, especially since there are longer breaks every set of two games.
• Finally, Paige's recovery close to being herself does not put too much pressure on her because the where the team's performance is. She doesn't have to carry much of the scoring load so she can prioritize playmaking, which is her natural inclination.

Now then, they only have the first game where the opponent is thoroughly overmatched. It gets harder by the 2nd game but if each one in this team plays only at the level they have shown before in crucial moments during their survival run, they should pass the test of the regionals. Stanford will be a steep challenge but the team shall have gone through a gauntlet of three fairly difficult games, especially NC State. They will be ready.

I consider Stanford the greater challenge than South Carolina.

As for whether they can rebound with the opposition, it is not the sole determinant in winning: rebounding, defense, offense. If the offense is effective, the chances of being outrebounded is less. If the defense is effective, the chances of winning dramatically increases. The season statistics of each of their opponents mean less if the true quality of this team shows up in each of the six games.

Opponents: be afraid, be very afraid........

 

[Cuango]

I don't understand this fatigue comment? SC also played 3 games in 3 days so does that mean they have more endurance and stamina than Uconn? Fatigue had nothing to do with the loss, they couldn't stop Boston and not sure they can still. Maybe if they double team her and let someone else beat them is worth a shot but again a hill to climb before that scenario if does happen for both teams. And for me when it comes to team with the most depth is still Stanford, they can put 8-9 players and the emergence of Kiki Iriafen has made them even tougher to play.

Agree that fatigue was not what caused the loss but to say it had nothing to do with it is going a bit too far. Boston is clearly a stud and has the edge in the post with every team in the country. That’s not even debatable. However, she certainly doesn’t make SC unbeatable. I believe we have enough to at least keep her fro totally dominating the game. If Liv can hit some outside shots and we keep the rebounding (especially offensive) numbers fairly
close, I believe we can survive Boston’s superiority.

I think it’s pretty fair to say we have the advantage in guard play and more depth there as well Clearly, SC and Stanford are favorites at this time (and may stay that way throughout the tournament) but I’m pretty convinced we are favored over every other team with the possible exception of NC State (possibly even)! However, we are on an upward trend as our team continues to gel, while the other teams will not improve beyond the (always possible) chances of having “one of those days”!

Our defense is now elite, perhaps less so than SC, but we’re not too far behind, we are healthy, Paige is back, our offense is beginning to look like UConn teams of yore, and importantly, pertaining to rebounding, AE has (knock wood) finally come out of the fog she’s been in all season and is playing like she did last season! We’re not the favorite but we’re close enough to where I like our chances!

I guarantee you, this team now has Geno’s full attention and I get the sense that he is in the same mode as he was in Renee’s final season when he worked so hard to ensure that she went off with a title! Here’s hoping for the same ending to a season we won’t soon forget!

 

[jchusky]

Agree that fatigue was not what caused the loss but to say it had nothing to do with it is going a bit too far. Boston is clearly a stud and has the edge in the post with every team in the country. That’s not even debatable. However, she certainly doesn’t make SC unbeatable. I believe we have enough to at least keep her fro totally dominating the game. If Liv can hit some outside shots and we keep the rebounding (especially offensive) numbers fairly
close, I believe we can survive Boston’s superiority.

I think it’s pretty fair to say we have the advantage in guard play and more depth there as well Clearly, SC and Stanford are favorites at this time (and may stay that way throughout the tournament) but I’m pretty convinced we are favored over every other team with the possible exception of NC State (possibly even)! However, we are on an upward trend as our team continues to gel, while the other teams will not improve beyond the (always possible) chances of having “one of those days”!

Our defense is now elite, perhaps less so than SC, but we’re not too far behind, we are healthy, Paige is back, our offense is beginning to look like UConn teams of yore, and importantly, pertaining to rebounding, AE has (knock wood) finally come out of the fog she’s been in all season and is playing like she did last season! We’re not the favorite but we’re close enough to where I like our chances!

I guarantee you, this team now has Geno’s full attention and I get the sense that he is in the same mode as he was in Renee’s final season when he worked so hard to ensure that she went off with a title! Here’s hoping for the same ending to a season we won’t soon forget!

do you mind me asking what made this defense elite? The wins over Depaul, ST John's, Xavier? Because I just saw Depaul get destroyed by 30+ to a Dayton team that barely got in the tournament. The Big East is not an indicator to me of someone becoming elite.

 

[oldude]

I had been contemplating starting a thread to talk about UConn’s pressure defense and why it’s so effective. I’ll use this thread to express my thoughts:

• UConn’s depth allows this team to pressure full court for 40 minutes, without fatigue or fouls being a significant factor. The pressure doesn’t stop when opponents get the ball over half court as UConn continues to trap & hedge in the half court.
• The pressure defense speeds up opponents, while conversely cutting 7-10 seconds from opponent’s offensive possessions to set up and run their offense. That equals turnovers & bad shots.
• UConn hedges/switches on all screens extremely effectively. The Huskies can do this because of a combination of big guards and athletic Bigs. No other team in the country is as effective switching on defense as UConn.
• UConn has become a much better team defending the arc. 3-pt shooters have very little room, if any, to get off shots. At the same time, secondary switches in the paint by UConn eliminate opportunities for easy layups.

As for rebounding, while the BE is not Stanford or SC, it is absolutely clear that the Huskies have become a much better rebounding team. Earlier in the season, UConn struggled rebounding against teams like Marquette & Villanova. During the BE tournament, on average, UConn had a +17 rebounding advantage, with a remarkable 39-17 advantage in the championship game.

UConn is not only getting better rebounding from their 3 Bigs, but the Husky guards are all exceptionally good rebounders. Christyn, Nika, Evina & Caroline all stand out as strong rebounding guards.

So I have the exact opposite take of those who suggest UConn’s defense & rebounding is suspect. Rebounding & defense are exceptional strengths of this UConn team, so much so, that the Huskies can still win a tough defensive battle when their offense is not clicking on all cylinders.

 

[visitingcock]

I may be missing it, as I am old, but I’m not seeing where the OP stated that UConn’s has better bench quality bigs than SCAnd Stanford? Clearly we don’t have an edge there but I just can’t find where JoePgh made that statement?

Perhaps I should not have paraphrased. Joe's post was about: "Is UConn's Rebounding Good Enough For an NC?"
.

In that context, Joe said: "Regarding the latter [depth of talent], no other team including the Gamecocks has players of the quality of Evina, Dorka, Caroline, and Nika coming off the bench."

So, yeah. Joe didn't precisely say what I paraphrased. I apologize to him and all. But, UConn's depth in rebounders doesn't match SCar or Stanford. SCar's depth at guard doesn't match UConn's. We do have some depth a guard defensively, but we come up short offensively

 

[JonathanXIV]

Perhaps I should not have paraphrased. Joe's post was about: "Is UConn's Rebounding Good Enough For an NC?"
.

In that context, Joe said: "Regarding the latter [depth of talent], no other team including the Gamecocks has players of the quality of Evina, Dorka, Caroline, and Nika coming off the bench."

So, yeah. Joe didn't precisely say what I paraphrased. I apologize to him and all. But, UConn's depth in rebounders doesn't match SCar or Stanford. SCar's depth at guard doesn't match UConn's. We do have some depth a guard defensively, but we come up short offensively

I think your last paragraph is exactly right. Which is what would make a UConn-South Carolina match up so interesting.

 

[CONN78SEJ]

This thread is really a reaction to a post in the "DePaul Loses Big" thread. In Post #61 in that thread, a certain poster who is well-known for constant negative commentary expressed the opinion that defense and rebounding are the key to winning national championships (citing Pat Summitt on that subject), and that both Stanford and South Carolina have both of these capabilities at a "much higher level" than UConn. That comment and that issue didn't really belong in a thread about DePaul's loss to Dayton, so I am starting this new thread to focus on it.

There is a certain plausibility to his opinion, at least with respect to rebounding (I don't think his opinion is at all plausible with respect to defense). I would agree to this extent: if UConn does not win the NC this year, it will be because its rebounding was inferior to that of some opponent, most likely one of the two who were named. If UConn can play those teams and hold its own on the boards, then UConn should win because all other aspects of its game are superior to those of the opponent: shooting, playmaking, passing, and depth of talent on the roster. Regarding the latter, no other team including the Gamecocks has players of the quality of Evina, Dorka, Caroline, and Nika coming off the bench. That depth means that UConn should be able to play more aggressively and worry less about fouls than either of its two main competitors.

But can UConn rebound adequately against South Carolina or Stanford? It is very difficult to get objective evidence about this. If someone like me, who believes the answer is "Yes", cites UConn's recent rebounding success against Big East teams, that evidence will be dismissed because it is, after all, the Big East -- supposedly a powderpuff conference against whom one's grandmother could rebound successfully. If someone who believes the answer is "No" cites evidence from UConn's losses this year, especially against South Carolina in the Bahamas, that evidence can be dismissed as not representative of the current team and the obvious improvements in the play of Aaliyah and Dorka, and the emergence of Caroline, since that game.

So really, the only evidence that withstands both dismissals comes from a single game: UConn vs. Tennessee on February 6. That game is not against a Big East opponent; in fact, it was against a team which, at the time, had the best rebounding margin in the nation. Here are some key rebounding statistics from that game:

• Total rebounds were tied 38-38;
• Offensive rebounds for the game favored TN by 13-10, but in the first half, UConn led in O-bounds by a margin of 10-3 at one point.
• Tennessee missed 42 FGA's and rebounded 13 of those misses (31%), while UConn missed just 32 FGA's and rebounded 10 of those (also 31%). In other words, offensive rebounding efficiency was the same for both teams, and TN's higher total simply reflected more missed shots.
• Second-chance points, which are a key indicator of how much damage the opponent's control of the boards is doing, were 12-8 in TN's favor. That 4-point margin was obviously not a decisive factor in the game's outcome, but you could argue that it might be crucial in a closer game.
• Points in the paint favored TN by 20-12 (totals which clearly overlap with the second-chance point totals), but again, that did not have a major effect in a game that UConn won by 19 (and led by 25 when the benches were cleared with about a minute left to play).
• In individual play, Tamari Key scored 8 points with 1 block, and got all of 3 (!) rebounds in 28 minutes, while Liv got 6 points with 3 rebounds and 3 blocks. Pretty even, in other words. At the "4" position, Dye/Darby got 1 point and 5 rebounds compared to AE/Dorka getting 14 points and 11 rebounds. To my heavily biased eye test, Aaliyah dominated the boards in that game and was called for only 3 fouls.

Overall, these statistics lead me to the conclusion that UConn was approximately equal to TN on the boards or perhaps very slightly inferior, but not nearly inferior enough to overcome UConn's advantage in the other aspects of the game. Tennessee did not have 3-point shooters to worry UConn's defense, and its offense consisted almost entirely of 1-on-1 play by Horston and Burrell, rather than any serious ball movement. Even a 19-11 TN advantage in made free throws was insufficient to overcome these deficiencies.

If UConn's rebounding performance against Stanford and/or South Carolina approximates what it did against Tennessee, UConn should win both games, possibly by double digits. To beat UConn, those teams will have to either dominate the boards more than Tennessee could, or match UConn's "first shot" offensive efficiency. I think either of those roads to victory will be difficult for both of those teams.

Didn’t Anessa Morrow have like 28 or 29 points and 18 rebounds in the game yesterday? Maybe the team as a whole could have rebounded a little better but when maybe the best freshman rebounder in the country gets her share, you can’t fault her effort. I do recall her getting like 27 rbs in game not too long ago.

As for UConn’s rebounding over this season, it has gone up slightly in the 2nd half of the season vs the first half, with offensive rebounding by the team going up a lot more than that in the 2nd half vs the 1st half. I attribute this to Edwards, Dorka, Ono, and Ducharme just rebounding much better lately, especially on the offensive end.