Jeff Jacobs: Reality bites Auriemma, UConn

[scubadog]

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.

Excuse my ignorance in stating the wrong # of championships, as if that was the point I was making. So, KLS can't dribble, and Gabby simply made the wrong decision. Chong was given the ball in a difficult situation after hardly playing for 3 years. So, what is the excuse for KLS only taking 12 shots in the game and only a couple in the second half? Is it not up to the coaching staff to get the game plan and message to the players ?

 

[scubadog]

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..... ...

She will be graduating as far as I know. And Z is a better player right now than Stokes was when she left UConn. So I was never surprised by her decision . The fact that no one saw it coming , is the biggest mystery to me.

 

[hugefan]

Excuse my ignorance in stating the wrong # of championships, as if that was the point I was making. So, KLS can't dribble, and Gabby simply made the wrong decision. Chong was given the ball in a difficult situation after hardly playing for 3 years. So, what is the excuse for KLS only taking 12 shots in the game and only a couple in the second half? Is it not up to the coaching staff to get the game plan and message to the players ?

Geno said he should have but remember there are other factors that affect games, fouls and boy they were doling fouls out on KLS like they were giving her candy and 1 completely wrong call on a drive and then she could not even stand straight up and she got one. That crap affects how you play. Plus she was also needed to pass like the and 1 for Phee etc. who knows what was happening with her ankle too. There is just only so much a team can take.

 

[snowkot]

Looking at the play as designed, then hypothesizing on what if the inbound went to a different player is besides the point. The play went off as designed, the first option worked, in that the intended player got the ball, in space. The rest is execution, which failed.

Since criticism without suggesting alternatives is just complaining (lol) perhaps...

Another choice might have been:
- Stevens in the game, Dangerfield out
- Nurse inbounding
- line 4 at the foul line with Stevens and Samuelson as cutters.
- option 1 - Stevens strongside low block,
- option 2 - double screen strongside, catch and shoot for Samuelson
- Williams and Collier crashing the boards for last second putbacks

or Samuelson inbounding
- option 1 - same
- option 2 - Nurse off the double screen with an immediate return pass / catch and shoot to Samuelson moving inbounds to a spot

 

[Charliebball]

She will be graduating as far as I know. And Z is a better player right now than Stokes was when she left UConn. So I was never surprised by her decision . The fact that no one saw it coming , is the biggest mystery to me.

better offensively but not on the same planet defensively or as a rebounder

 

[scubadog]

Geno said he should have but remember there are other factors that affect games, fouls and boy they were doling fouls out on KLS like they were giving her candy and 1 completely wrong call on a drive and then she could not even stand straight up and she got one. That crap affects how you play. Plus she was also needed to pass like the and 1 for Phee etc. who knows what was happening with her ankle too. There is just only so much a team can take.

Noone is arguing the fact that the officials have allowed KLS to have the heck beat out of her . And the 4 th fouled called on her was a travesty.

 

[scubadog]

better offensively but not on the same planet defensively or as a rebounder

Never agued that fact. But most WNBA players are chosen because of their scoring ability.

 

[hugefan]

I agree Scuba and my response wasn’t just to you, I thought you had some really good points, I am just technically challenged with knowing how to include multiple quotes. Appreciate what you had to say.

 

[scubadog]

Looking at the play as designed, then hypothesizing on what if the inbound went to a different player is besides the point. The play went off as designed, the first option worked, in that the intended player got the ball, in space. The rest is execution, which failed.

Since criticism without suggesting alternatives is just complaining (lol) perhaps...

Another choice might have been:
- Stevens in the game, Dangerfield out
- Nurse inbounding
- line 4 at the foul line with Stevens and Samuelson as cutters.
- option 1 - Stevens strongside low block,
- option 2 - double screen strongside, catch and shoot for Samuelson
- Williams and Collier crashing the boards for last second putbacks

or Samuelson inbounding
- option 1 - same
- option 2 - Nurse off the double screen with an immediate return pass / catch and shoot to Samuelson moving inbounds to a spot

Perhaps you should be coaching?

 

[scubadog]

Heck, I remember when Stewart was a freshman at free throw line and an opposing player just tried intimidating her by trying to walk right thru her. No action by the official. It always stuck with me. And no, I do not remember what game it was.

 

[Charliebball]

Never agued that fact. But most WNBA players are chosen because of their scoring ability.

not always so...........you gotta do it all in the pros...........scoring 20 and giving up 18 doesn't help the team..........there are pro players that are known as great pick and roll defenders that are not great scorers but still stay in the league

 

[wallman]

If you cannot win the right way then you don't deserve respect. What I got from this year was that there were some real tacky behaviors on the coaching side and on the floor.

 

[maddoggy]

I, for one, have enjoyed -- and learned from -- many of your posts. Please DON'T go away.

Sparks fly in a busy workshop, and this is still raw for a lot of us. It may be more productive if we try to be hard on the issues and not on the people.

 

[BostonFan]

Excuse my ignorance in stating the wrong # of championships, as if that was the point I was making. So, KLS can't dribble, and Gabby simply made the wrong decision. Chong was given the ball in a difficult situation after hardly playing for 3 years. So, what is the excuse for KLS only taking 12 shots in the game and only a couple in the second half? Is it not up to the coaching staff to get the game plan and message to the players ?

Coaches get you in a position to win, but with the game on the line, its all about the players wanting it & executing for the win. All the greats do that. DT and a few others at UConn had that killer instinct. The last 2 years, not much. Knowing what GW is capable of doing with the ball in that position, it was a pretty weak & low percentage effort, imo.

 

[scubadog]

not always so......you gotta do it all in the pros......scoring 20 and giving up 18 doesn't help the team.....there are pro players that are known as great pick and roll defenders that are not great scorers but still stay in the league

True, players need to play some defense, but I think most are drafted for their offensive abilities. JMO

 

[Paesano]

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.

The funny thing is, I am not that upset by ND's 23 FTs. At least two of them were off a bogus charge call (or two) but I am OK with fouls being, you know, CALLED! The bigger issue were the lack of calls against ND. People say our players didn't draw fouls because they didn't drive aggressively. Actually, they DID. And the fouls weren't called. And then they became hesitant. People can say that players should adjust and be mentally tough instead of whining about the refs. Sure, in an ideal world, that is a great idea. In reality, they are college kids, not robots. Above all else, the fouls NEED to be called. The rules of the game NEED to be enforced. I want the calls to be fair, but fair isn't enough. This "let them play" crap has to stop. Call the damn fouls!!!

 

[snowkot]

Perhaps you should be coaching?

Snark? Either way - my personal background aside - better I think to expound with options rather than criticize. Implied that I disagreed with the concept...

 

[wallman]

Lets say the refs decided to let them play. Uconn would not have been called for the fouls they were called for, McCowan would n't have been called for her last foul and Fuering would not have fouled out of the game. The problem comes back to the inconsistency that one team was allowed to foul and yet the other team was not. Actually the other team was called for some fouls that didn't even exist.

 

[Paesano]

Lets say the refs decided to let them play. Uconn would not have been called for the fouls they were called for, McCowan would n't have been called for her last foul and Fuering would not have fouled out of the game. The problem comes back to the inconsistency that one team was allowed to foul and yet the other team was not. Actually the other team was called for some fouls that didn't even exist.

Consistency between teams is the first step. Then they need to be consistent with the rules of the game. Teams should not be rewarded for "being aggressive" when being aggressive means fouling. "Letting them play" = "Letting them foul".

 

[scubadog]

Snark? Either way - my personal background aside - better I think to expound with options rather than criticize. Implied that I disagreed with the concept...

I wasn't being snarky. Seems like no matter how you word things around here someone takes offense. Geez!

 

[Charliebball]

"She could have been the No. 1 pick in the WNBA draft. This would have brought her much fame and more money."

She's going to be the #2 or #3 pick in the draft. I believe there is exactly zero difference in WNBA salary between being the #1 and #2 pick. Staying in year sacrifices a year of earnings potential in Europe. In the short term at least, coming back to UConn would have definitely cost her money.

I agree that she is a "spectacular work in progress". It would have been interesting to see if Geno could have finally produced a finished product out of her. Ever since her freshman year at Duke, I've thought "Whoa, if this kid ever puts it together, watch out". She never fully did but was an All-American caliber player anyway.

I understand the sentiment that Geno could have helped her reach the next level and that ultimately would have benefited her career. But I find it presumptuous for an outsider to declare such a decision "bad". That's not for a sportswriter to decide. That's for Azura and her family to decide.

N.B. There are probably some posts of mine about Jewell Loyd that put me in a glass house on this issue.

Of course did anyone ever consider that from Azura's standpoint, Geno moved her inside for UConn's benefit as much or more then for her own..............perhaps she decided that she wants to continue as a wing using her once fairly good three point shooting and she's learned as much as she wants to know about playing inside......

 

[snowkot]

I wasn't being snarky. Seems like no matter how you word things around here someone takes offense. Geez!

My bad - response poorly worded. I meant to pose it as a serious question, not a declarative. To address it then, well, yeah, I've spent my fair share of time coaching, around coaches, and studying books on coaching and drills.

 

[HuskyNan]

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"?

Sorry about that. Ignore this guy.

 

[Roger G]

If you cannot win the right way then you don't deserve respect. What I got from this year was that there were some real tacky behaviors on the coaching side and on the floor.

Please supply some examples. Are you talking about the UConn coaching staff? I'm curious what you saw.

 

[wallman]

Please supply some examples. Are you talking about the UConn coaching staff? I'm curious what you saw.

Not at all Roger, quite the opposite. I have followed any of my posts I am not a big fan of coaches always whining to the press about their injuries as every team has them and I don't like the dissing when their team didn't get the awards that they thought they deserved in the ACC. Add in the player antics on the court which are not basketball then it's just a bad mix.