Laimbeer: Stokes is DPoY

[hoophuskee]

I have to respectfully disagree. Before I commented I just went back and watched the first half of the Texas game. Kiah was a major contributor in that game. She came int the game at the 12:35 mark with the score 17-12. Up until that point Texas was giving UConn trouble on the interior. Not only was Kiah blocking/changing shots and rebounding, but her passing, screening, and spacing was exceptional. I actually charted each Texas possession when Kiah was in the game and it was pretty ugly. What I saw was with Kiahs entrance was Uconn being able to control the interior. This allowed them to get out on the fast break. When Kiah left the game at the 1:09 mark the score was 50-24.

I see my post completely echoes Hoophuskees post. So I will stop here.

Music to my ears! If you want to - please post away.

 

[hoophuskee]

1--- I know some on here have said they’ve seen Stokes with this new confidence- maybe slightly she might but in general I think those that say it – basically have made it up. Unless anyone that has said it can define “the new confidence?” I’ll watch in games. Hope she is more than 100 but is 1000% more confident and more. So please those that say it- please tell. I’m not being sarcastic. – So please tell.

It seems like I can give stats below what can the ones that claim they “see” more confidence what can they say?

2—As usual Dobbs brings up an excellent point of more ft’s per game, but on a per minute basis it isn’t that much (averages out to a little over 6 more free throws for the entire season thus far comparing on a per minute basis). And on a per minute basis Stokes shot a bit more at UCONN vs now. Thus for anyone to declare she is shooting more- she is because of ft attempts but overall as the stats and Dobbs have shown – her offensive number improvement numbers though are slight. Yet her percentages aren’t better in the pros vs UCONN, so how can someone say they see so much more confidence when her percentages are worse? It's "slight."

And if her percentages are worse- then how is this a significant improvement? It's slight, isn't it?

3--- And for those to suggest her defense is more dominant now than in college- imo any fair-minded person will determine that to be laughable. For example all the games we won like 60-10 in the paint and even last night for example Tina guarded Griner. How many games UCONN was challenged in which Kiah got 10 plus minutes did she not guard the best player?

4--- And for those t say Liberty were looking for her- well Boyd and Sugar and Carson – are erratic shooters, are they not? Secondly, because they “look for her” – does that mean she is “better” or does it mean her teammates are worse in terms of relative comparison vs the competition? Or does it mean “they have no other place to go?” Sugar for example is a hot-and-cold shooter. Third and most importantly, how much are they really “looking for her” THIS SEASON when her attempts per game are just slightly above what she received at UCONN?

5--- And we’ve heard they need to get her the ball more as all she needs to do is run the floor and post hard. Well what happens when she isn’t posting “hard” and is content to get the ball to Tina – the former MVP of the WNBA? She isn’t getting that many more attempts vs college so does this mean she isn’t posting hard or her teammates and coaches are incompetent or she remains content to ride Tina?

 

[hoophuskee]

Two small corrections or clarifying a bit

For number 1 when I say please tell- I mean please tell what are the things one sees that she is more confident? What are the signs that one sees in which they know she is more confident?

2-- Regarding "6 more free throws" on a per minute basis I meant as of this moment it would be 6 more free throws.

 

[HoopsFan21]

I have to respectfully disagree. Before I commented I just went back and watched the first half of the Texas game. Kiah was a major contributor in that game. She came int the game at the 12:35 mark with the score 17-12. Up until that point Texas was giving UConn trouble on the interior. Not only was Kiah blocking/changing shots and rebounding, but her passing, screening, and spacing was exceptional. I actually charted each Texas possession when Kiah was in the game and it was pretty ugly. What I saw was with Kiahs entrance was Uconn being able to control the interior. This allowed them to get out on the fast break. When Kiah left the game at the 1:09 mark the score was 50-24.

I see my post completely echoes Hoophuskees post. So I will stop here.

The original post was that UConn would have lost to Texas if not for Kiah Stokes. I didn't realize everyone except me was nervous about that game and thought we were going to lose it if not for Kiah saving the day. UConn has some pretty good players in that starting five - Stewie and Mo outscoring the entire Texas team, for example. There were other games where the team got off to a rocky start and were eventually able to pull away, so I don't know why Texas as an opponent would have been any different, especially since it was a team weakened by injuries. Even McGee-Stafford was playing on a reinforced tibia. As the team showed at the start of the second half, they would have put that game away one way or another, even as Kiah watched from the bench during what might have been the best 4 minutes of basketball the team played all year. Sure the game was close when Kiah initially entered, as most 7-minute old basketball games are, but that Texas team was clearly over matched in that game as the 51 point margin of victory indicates.

 

[hoophuskee]

The original post was that UConn would have lost to Texas if not for Kiah Stokes. I didn't realize everyone except me was nervous about that game and thought we were going to lose it if not for Kiah saving the day. UConn has some pretty good players in that starting five - Stewie and Mo outscoring the entire Texas team, for example. There were other games where the team got off to a rocky start and were eventually able to pull away, so I don't know why Texas as an opponent would have been any different, especially since it was a team weakened by injuries. Even McGee-Stafford was playing on a reinforced tibia. As the team showed at the start of the second half, they would have put that game away one way or another, even as Kiah watched from the bench during what might have been the best 4 minutes of basketball the team played all year. Sure the game was close when Kiah initially entered, as most 7-minute old basketball games are, but that Texas team was clearly over matched in that game as the 51 point margin of victory indicates.

The post has also been mentioned to also reflect the game may have been close if not for Kiah. IMO the point that nan had made overall was that Kiah had a huge impact in that game. Do you agree that Kiah had a HUGE impact on the game? if not - so who do you think had an impact ont he game? Only players that scored a lot of points? Defense and rebounding can't turn around a game which could be close and turning it into a blowout?

And imo your point about UCONN getting off to other rocky starts but winning imo is irrelevant. UONN kept Stanford in the game and how did that go? We had a lead just like Texas- so how did that go? As for your point about "being worried" -- really- so all the losses in UCONN History other than vs top 5 teams you were worried? You can predict all the prior UCONN defeats vs non-top 5 teams and all the close calls? If you can't, then why do you bring up the beginning of the Texas game in which you expected UCONN to win as relevant?

And you want to ignore UCONN getting annihilated on the glass and thinking magically they would have corrected it without Stokes - go ahead but some of us aren't as sure as you. Maybe we win - but the point was Stokes was a HUGE impact. She DID change the momentum and flow of the game.

And again you completely disregard momentum. Again what happened in Stanford? Did Stewart get worn down? So you and most of us have seen basketball for 20-40 years you think it's out of the question that when a team is getting bulldozed on the glass that they won't wear down? UCONN is incapable of getting worn down even though we saw it happen earlier in the season?

 

[HoopsFan21]

The post has also been mentioned to also reflect the game may have been close if not for Kiah. IMO the point that nan had made overall was that Kiah had a huge impact in that game. Do you agree that Kiah had a HUGE impact on the game? if not - so who do you think had an impact ont he game? Only players that scored a lot of points? Defense and rebounding can't turn around a game which could be close and turning it into a blowout?

And imo your point about UCONN getting off to other rocky starts but winning imo is irrelevant. UONN kept Stanford in the game and how did that go? We had a lead just like Texas- so how did that go? As for your point about "being worried" -- really- so all the losses in UCONN History other than vs top 5 teams you were worried? You can predict all the prior UCONN defeats vs non-top 5 teams and all the close calls? If you can't, then why do you bring up the beginning of the Texas game in which you expected UCONN to win as relevant?

And you want to ignore UCONN getting annihilated on the glass and thinking magically they would have corrected it without Stokes - go ahead but some of us aren't as sure as you. Maybe we win - but the point was Stokes was a HUGE impact. She DID change the momentum and flow of the game.

And again you completely disregard momentum. Again what happened in Stanford? Did Stewart get worn down? So you and most of us have seen basketball for 20-40 years you think it's out of the question that when a team is getting bulldozed on the glass that they won't wear down? UCONN is incapable of getting worn down even though we saw it happen earlier in the season?

Texas was not a top 5 team. They were a 5 seed in the tourney, and even that may have been generous. Unlike the Stanford game, we were essentially playing at home on a court Stewie loves with 150 of her friends and family watching, and had just spent the last 30 games working out all the kinks of a new offense by demolishing teams at a 40 point clip. Much different circumstances.

 

[hoophuskee]

Texas was not a top 5 team. They were a 5 seed in the tourney, and even that may have been generous. Unlike the Stanford game, we were essentially playing at home on a court Stewie loves with 150 of her friends and family watching, and had just spent the last 30 games working out all the kinks of a new offense by demolishing teams at a 40 point clip. Much different circumstances.

I never said Texas was a top 5 team. I said non top 5 teams. So I ask again what non top 5 teams have you predicted UCONN lost to or was a tight and it shouldn't have been in which you knew? You pegged all of them?

Secondly, it was even worse in NCAA's - you lose and your season is over. Much more pressure.

Third, you keep referring to 2nd half which is totally irrelevant. How can they be expected to play the way did in the 2nd half if the entire 1st half they were to get pummeled on the glass?

Fourth, you're right most of us if not all of expected UCONN to win. In part because we knew vs big teams we had a player like Stokes so they probably weren't going to wear us down.

 

[TFintheMix]

Even assuming everything you say is true - and, not a reflection of minutes per game, etc. - that doesn't substantiate the contention that "she was never given a chance..". That sort of statement puts all the onus on somebody, everybody, else but Kiah...

I really appreciate your response and you make great points. I am glad that your brought up how much a change of environment can make such a huge difference. At UConn, Kiah often didn't look confident on the offensive end of the floor. With the Liberty, her body language and how she is used is almost shocking after being just a few months removed from college. And I am not taking away anything from Geno as a coach. Some people may need more nurturing and encouragement. At least publicly, you get the sense that Lambeer is a big fan and is unequivocal about Kiah being more assertive offensively.