Jeff Jacobs: Reality bites Auriemma, UConn

[Charliebball]

Didn't Kiah Stokes improve after she left UConn? Are there literally no good coaches in the WNBA? (That's rhetorical; I don't follow the WNBA very closely but I happen to think Cheryl Reeve and Brian Agler are excellent coaches, so there's at least 2) Maybe, just maybe, Stevens will continue to develop as a pro and she'll be just fine.

Also who's to say everything would've magically come together for Stevens as a Sr. at UConn. She was there for 2 years. If she still had a tendency to drift to the perimeter after 2 years, why would it have changed her Sr. year?

the WNBA is not a developmental league.............Z left Geno's class with only half of the lesson learned............the expectations of being a high WNBA draft choice may weigh heavily on her until she completes her education..... ........

 

[boontonbomber]

the WNBA is not a developmental league...Z left Geno's class with only half of the lesson learned..the expectations of being a high WNBA draft choice may weigh heavily on her until she completes her education..... ...

but her wallet will also weigh more heavily.

 

[nwhoopfan]

the WNBA is not a developmental league...Z left Geno's class with only half of the lesson learned..the expectations of being a high WNBA draft choice may weigh heavily on her until she completes her education..... ...

I understand the concept, but most players that stick in the WNBA improve after they become a professional. Somehow there is some development happening.

But again, Z already had 2 years. Why was one more year going to make a drastic difference?

 

[HuskyBandDad]

Not sure what your point is.

The ND coaches are paid to give Muffet the same suggestions as Uconn coaches give Geno.
Why is it so hard for fans to give credit to the other team?
ND executed a little better then Uconn. And Uconn did not shoot very well.
Some here have suggested that Geno should have taken his BEST SCORER out of the game. Really?
What would everyone say if they lost with Lou on the bench?

 

[CamrnCrz1974]

I'm also glad Jacobs said it - re: Stevens. Apparently she surprised Geno by leaving (I wonder what went thru her mind). And per Jacobs, "Bad decision, Azura". I agree. No one in the W is going to push her to be more of a post presence like Geno and CD would have. Her interior game will not develop the same way in the pros as it would have at UCONN.

It would not surprise me to see her range way more out on the perimeter in the W and forego learning more about playing effectively in the post. I asked in a different thread if her career will be closer to Iciss Tillis or Brit Griner. It remains to be seen, but if she fancies herself a wing, it will be more Iciss Tillis.

Z's inclination is to roam the outside and shoot 3's which as she is far from a great 3 point shooter and being 6'6, a waste and makes her I. Tillis and how long of a career did she have in the WNBA? Geno was transforming her to be much more of a post player against her instincts and another year of doing that with strength training would have helped her tremendously. Oh well...

@EricLA , that was an interesting comparison, by referencing Tillis and Griner. I believe a better player comparison at the top end of the spectrum is Elena Delle Donne, if you are using Iciss Tillis on the low end of the spectrum. I wanted to respond to both your post and @dtbtbtb 's post together.

Having seen both players countless times in college, here is my assessment of Iciss Tillis vs. Azura Stevens:
-- In terms of north/south speed and leaping ability, Tillis was superior.
-- Tillis was a slightly better three-point shooter (using Stevens' three-point shooting at Duke as the barometer, instead of the one year at UConn).
-- Tillis was not especially adept at getting her own shot.
-- Stevens, by contrast, is much better at creating her own shot. Her pull-up and mid-range jumpers are excellent.
-- Stevens is better in attacking the boards at angles.
-- Stevens is a better rebounder and shotblocker.
-- Stevens is mentally tougher and more aggressive than Tillis, which was obvious from the first minute Azura walked onto the floor.
-- Iciss Tillis was a ridiculous athlete who happened to play basketball.
-- Azura Stevens is a basketball player who happens to be a very good athlete. Stevens would be a basketball player at any height.

Basically, it boils down to these key points, in my assessment:

Azura Stevens is a natural guard. She grew up being a guard, playing the position. She then had a massive growth sport.

Stevens' game is built for the modern pro game. If a WNBA franchise is drafting Azura Stevens to make her into a center, that would be, to be blunt, idiotic, unless you are running a five-out motion, like Phoenix did in 2007.

In essence, Stevens is not Tillis (she is significantly better than Tillis), nor is she Griner (Stevens is not a center). She is going to be a better Tangela Smith, in that Stevens is more physical, has a handle, can attack the rim, but also can face-up. Tangela Smith made one All Star team and was a career 11.0 ppg scorer over her 15 WNBA seasons. I see Stevens as the next evolution of Smith, someone who can make a few All Star teams, but will not likely be a first or second All-WNBA team performer. In other words, she will be a great WNBA player, but not an outstanding one.

 

[MilfordHusky]

I understand the concept, but most players that stick in the WNBA improve after they become a professional. Somehow there is some development happening.

But again, Z already had 2 years. Why was one more year going to make a drastic difference?

We learned that Z really didn’t get coached up much over 2016-17. Though she was there then, she really had only 1 year of meaningful practices and games at UConn. She was on an uptrend at the end of this year. Many of us view the coaching job as incomplete.

Yes, Agler and Reeve—at least—are excellent coaches, but it’s not a development league per se. Some players definitely improve, whereas some don’t very much. I hope Z can reach her potential.

 

[MilfordHusky]

@EricLA , that was an interesting comparison, by referencing Tillis and Griner. I believe a better player comparison at the top end of the spectrum is Elena Delle Donne, if you are using Iciss Tillis on the low end of the spectrum. I wanted to respond to both your post and @dtbtbtb 's post together.

Having seen both players countless times in college, here is my assessment of Iciss Tillis vs. Azura Stevens:
-- In terms of north/south speed and leaping ability, Tillis was superior.
-- Tillis was a slightly better three-point shooter (using Stevens' three-point shooting at Duke as the barometer, instead of the one year at UConn).
-- Tillis was not especially adept at getting her own shot.
-- Stevens, by contrast, is much better at creating her own shot. Her pull-up and mid-range jumpers are excellent.
-- Stevens is better in attacking the boards at angles.
-- Stevens is a better rebounder and shotblocker.
-- Stevens is mentally tougher and more aggressive than Tillis, which was obvious from the first minute Azura walked onto the floor.
-- Iciss Tillis was a ridiculous athlete who happened to play basketball.
-- Azura Stevens is a basketball player who happens to be a very good athlete. Stevens would be a basketball player at any height.

Basically, it boils down to these key points, in my assessment:

Azura Stevens is a natural guard. She grew up being a guard, playing the position. She then had a massive growth sport.

Stevens' game is built for the modern pro game. If a WNBA franchise is drafting Azura Stevens to make her into a center, that would be, to be blunt, idiotic, unless you are running a five-out motion, like Phoenix did in 2007.

In essence, Stevens is not Tillis (she is significantly better than Tillis), nor is she Griner (Stevens is not a center). She is going to be a better Tangela Smith, in that Stevens is more physical, has a handle, can attack the rim, but also can face-up. Tangela Smith made one All Star team and was a career 11.0 ppg scorer over her 15 WNBA seasons. I see Stevens as the next evolution of Smith, someone who can make a few All Star teams, but will not likely be a first or second All-WNBA team performer. In other words, she will be a great WNBA player, but not an outstanding one.

Cam, do you think Z compares to DeWanna Bonner? Is her upside anywhere near EDD?

 

[nwhoopfan]

We learned that Z really didn’t get coached up much over 2016-17. Though she was there then, she really had only 1 year of meaningful practices and games at UConn.

Wow. That seems concerning to me. So pretty much wasted the RS year? What was she doing if she wasn't being coached up or participating in meaningful practice time? I know Geno is the GOAT, but many basketball programs take full advantage of the RS year for a player.

 

[CamrnCrz1974]

Cam, do you think Z compares to DeWanna Bonner? Is her upside anywhere near EDD?

@MilfordHusky , DeWanna Booner is a wing. She was a guard in high school. She was a perimeter-oriented player who could rebound in college. But she has been exclusively a perimeter player in the WNBA. In Phoenix, she has only been a shooting guard or small forward - in other words, a wing.

In the WNBA, Azura Stevens is going to be a designated power forward who will be successful if she is working with another post player who can also step out and has range on her shot and with whom she can rotate positions offensively and defensively, depending on matchups.

Ideally, she would be drafted at #3 by Chicago and paired with Stefanie Dolson. Their game complement each other so well that it will be a great pairing (especially since Chicago has a hole at PF with Jessica Breland signing with Atlanta in the offseason).

As far as Stevens' upside, I do not see her at the level of Elena Delle Donne. Stevens has a good handle and can hit the outside shot. Delle Donne can handle and create better and is a much better shooter overall. And if paired together in Washington (purely hypothetical), Delle Donne would be the starter at SF, with Azura at PF, and Emma Meesseman at C (as an aside, Meesseman is missing the 2018 WNBA season).

 

[DEpup]

"Now, if you said to me you should have given Lou a breather, I would have said you are absolutely right.”

so I guess even Geno makes mistakes occasionally....but who could he have brought in to replace her for a few minutes?

Walker. What were the other 3 coaches doing in advising him?

 

[snowkot]

Given nearly unlimited access, the sheer volume of quotes, and an undeniably impetuous nature when pressed, Coach not infrequently contradicts himself.

E.g."<paraphrasing>:
- "If we have one last shot to win, it's going to be Lou" (multiple times) With 3.6 seconds left and one last shot to win, he designs a play for Gabby Williams, with "Lou" apparently not even a second option.
- "Azura is probably the most important player on the team. She is the key to us winning a national championship." She plays the least minutes of anyone, and is not on the court for the deciding baskets.

Even in the article, we have Jacobs offering:
"After Stevens turned the game around with her dominating play in the second quarter, I thought Auriemma should have started her after halftime instead of waiting until 3:35 left in the third."
to which coach replied
“I never gave it a single thought. We were up eight in the fourth quarter. So I guess things turned out pretty well. You go with what you were doing."

"You go with what you were doing." UConn lost the first quarter 24-14, largely without Stevens. They won the second quarter 27-10, almost all with Stevens. What they were doing was turning a double digit deficit into a not insignificant lead, with Stevens on the floor. A lead which was subsequently all but lost without Stevens on the floor to start the 3rd quarter.

Against the backdrop of the previous game against ND, in which Stevens had a massive role turning a sure loss into a 4th quarter win, one would have hoped coach would have given it just a bit more than a single thought...

 

[hugefan]

You miss the most important part, the inbound pass, no one else could have made that pass.

 

[the Q]

The part about the inbound play was on point.

It was a brilliant playcall.

He got his senior leader the ball one one with no one to help with plenty of time to make a move.

Gabby panicked a bit and threw up a rushed shot.

The ND girl hit her prayer.

Is Geno still out-coached if his brilliant playcall works out?

 

[the Q]

Given bearly unlimited access, the sheer volume of quotes, and an undeniably impetuous nature when pressed, Coach not infrequently contradicts himself.

E.g."<paraphrasing>:
- "If we have one last shot to win, it's going to be Lou" (multiple times) With 3.6 seconds left and one last shot to win, he designs a play for Gabby Williams, with "Lou" apparently not even a second option.
- "Azura is probably the most important player on the team. She is the key to us winning a national championship." She plays the least minutes of anyone, and is not on the court for the deciding baskets.

Even in the article, we have Jacobs offering:
"After Stevens turned the game around with her dominating play in the second quarter, I thought Auriemma should have started her after halftime instead of waiting until 3:35 left in the third."
to which coach replied
“I never gave it a single thought. We were up eight in the fourth quarter. So I guess things turned out pretty well. You go with what you were doing."

"You go with what you were doing." UConn lost the first quarter 24-14, largely without Stevens. They won the second quarter 27-10, almost all with Stevens. What they were doing was turning a double digit deficit into a not insignificant lead, with Stevens on the floor. A lead which was subsequently all but lost without Stevens on the floor to start the 3rd quarter.

Against the backdrop of the previous game against ND, in which Stevens had a massive role turning a sure loss into a 4th quarter win, one would have hoped coach would have given it just a bit more than a single thought...

I don't know the rules about criticizing any facet of a player's game.

But that situation was not Lou's strength. She's not a creator off the bounce. Not right now. And neither is nurse.

When I saw the formation I thought that would be Z down low. That also would've been a great playcall.

 

[Sluconn Husky]

The part about the inbound play was on point.

It was a brilliant playcall.

He got his senior leader the ball one one with no one to help with plenty of time to make a move.

Gabby panicked a bit and threw up a rushed shot.

The ND girl hit her prayer.

Is Geno still out-coached if his brilliant playcall works out?

Gabby has not made of lot of scoring moves from that position the last two years. Most of her offense now is quick drives and jumpers. To me, that's not the player or shot that best suited UConn. Stevens was all but unguardable when allowed to play. I'd have taken my chances with something near the basket for her or almost anything from KLS.

In short, I thought it was a terrible decision.

 

[Sluconn Husky]

KLS scores off screens and hand offs all the time. I fear deference to Gabby's seniority and special place in UConn hierarchy may have led to her getting the ball.

 

[boontonbomber]

The ND coaches are paid to give Muffet the same suggestions as Uconn coaches give Geno.
Why is it so hard for fans to give credit to the other team?
ND executed a little better then Uconn. And Uconn did not shoot very well.
Some here have suggested that Geno should have taken his BEST SCORER out of the game. Really?
What would everyone say if they lost with Lou on the bench?

OK, I get your point re assistants. I think the suggestions were that Samuelson should have been given a breather, rather than having her play the full 45 minutes. Possible that might have made her a bit fresher in the 4th and OT. Always good to have your best player a bit rested for the end.

 

[the Q]

Gabby has not made of lot of scoring moves from that position the last two years. Most of her offense now is quick drives and jumpers. To me, that's not the player or shot that best suited UConn. Stevens was all but unguardable when allowed to play. I'd have taken my chances with something near the basket for her or almost anything from KLS.

In short, I thought it was a terrible decision.

That’s my point. She had time for a quick drive. But her play didn’t act like it.

 

[GiladKatzDeli]

In terms of skill development, one year under Geno and co is far better than being a rookie in the WNBA. I know Z will be a high draft pick and everything, but she hasn't scratched the surface of her potential yet and in my opinion, she has a better chance of unlocking it at UConn than anywhere else.

As for Geno, I think he may actually enjoy a different set of coaching challenges next year. Some of the pressure will be off. I think he'll try some different things next year and there will be some adjustments, but it's still going to be a team capable of winning the national championship.

 

[scubadog]

The fact of the matter is : KLS did not get the ball, for the last shot, two years in a row . Nearly the same circumstances. Those facts are reality. KLS is the best " shooter " on the team. Since UConn owns 11 Championships , the coaching staff will never get criticism for that decision. Gabby is a wonderful player whom we will all miss. But, she is " not " UConn's best shooter. Most great coaches will live and die with their best shooter taking the final shot. It's up to the coaching staff to get KLS shots. In that sense the coaching staff failed miserably. The numbers don't lie. Facts are facts !

 

[the Q]

The fact of the matter is : KLS did not get the ball, for the last shot, two years in a row . Nearly the same circumstances. Those facts are reality. KLS is the best " shooter " on the team. Since UConn owns 11 Championships , the coaching staff will never get criticism for that decision. Gabby is a wonderful player whom we will all miss. But, she is " not " UConn's best shooter. Most great coaches will live and die with their best shooter taking the final shot. It's up to the coaching staff to get KLS shots. In that sense the coaching staff failed miserably. The numbers don't lie. Facts are facts !

The problem is KLS is not good off the dribble. And with it being a side out, it's a lot harder to get a good look there.

Gabby should've drove to the hoop and we're not even having these convos. We are celebrating title #12.

Last year....i still don't know what the hell Chong was thinking.

 

[Orangutan]

Hey, here is an idea. How about, instead of coming to a UConn board to celebrate one of our players leaving early, you spend a LOT more time on a ND board? You have no idea where she is going to be picked in the draft. You also have no idea how this change in path will affect her long term earnings. Just go away.

I'm discussing UConn women's basketball on a UConn women's basketball forum and I think I'm perfectly entitled to do so. Nothing about my post was celebratory.

The AP's mock draft (taken from a poll of WNBA coaches and GMs) and Howard Megdal's mock draft both put Stevens at #4. #3 and #4 are functionally the same because Chicago has both picks. I haven't heard anyone say she is going lower than 5. I don't have a crystal ball. I just know what the the top reporters in women's basketball are projecting.

Do I need to make a burner account for non-ND related posts, so you'll stop following me around? Maybe a masked alias like "Mr. Posting II"?

 

[donalddoowop]

If KLS should have gotten more shots, certainly Z should have gotten more.

 

[the Q]

I thought KLS passed on quite a few good looks.

 

[hugefan]

Ignore the ND apologist.

The pass was on the money and no one could have made it, we got a shot, the D would have sent 2 players to KLS, I just wish Gabby had taken her usual 1 dribble around as she would have skyed up and away for the lay up as there was enough time. C’est la Vie. That does not excuse the fact that the refs gave 23 free throws to ND and it’s unfathomble that they got away with it.