Louisville Game Combinations

[oldude]

More than that. There are duplicates in the list. It's a chronological progression of subs, not a list of unique combinations.

I had not noticed. I stand corrected.

 

[WiseWillie]

True but Serah is a better rebounder than Jana and with a high PER team as pointed out by Gael with K9, KK, Azzi, Serah and Sarah on the floor, are you really losing any rebounds that Paige would have got at the 3 position? The #15 combination above started the 4th quarter and played 4 minutes. The rebounding was 3 defensive rebounds for Louisville and 2 for us. Louisville only missed 2 shots and we missed 3. All the rebounds were easy going right to the defender. The score was a margin of 21 when the fourth quarter began and was the same when the 4 minutes had elapsed.

So your point is well taken that Blanca and probably Morgan and Caroline are our natural 3s but I really liked combo #15 and I hope we see more of it.

I didn't see the drop off in the rebounding without a true 3 though. I did see it in the "in the lane" defense in the sense that it was open for a drive or to penetrate without any size to stop that 3 position offensive player. That I think is the weakness of combo #15 and even #16 when Ash came in to replace Azzi. It allows drives. Of course, you offset that with an explosive offensive combo and if one of our 3s dropped or Serah didn't walk on an easy lay up it would have been plus 5 at a minimum.

I can see why analytics become addictive. I still place great value on the "eye test" and that #15 combo is really very pleasing to the view.

Rebounding is one thing but in the second half Louisville's game plan was to drive aggressively to the basket hoping to draw fouls and in so doing increasing their FTR. That is defintely something that would expect to be worked on defending before Sunday.

 

[msf22b]

Dear BBallF... You 'seem' to like K9!

Hard.not.to

 

[BBallF]

Rebounding is one thing but in the second half Louisville's game plan was to drive aggressively to the basket hoping to draw fouls and in so doing increasing their FTR. That is defintely something that would expect to be worked on defending before Sunday.

Yes, I said that. Last year you had Paige at the 3 when Jana was in the game. On Tuesday you had 3 smaller guards in KK, K9 and Azzi on defense at times and Azzi had foul trouble. Really, Blanca is the answer eventually and Morgan would be the answer now on defense if she were healthy. A medium size small forward will have a height advantage against our threesome of guards. You can't play soft or release defense and I do think it will be fixed.

 

[Zarathustra]

Hard.not.to

I follow your replies to multiple threats and always enjoy
your insights. GO K9 ! Go Huskies! My comment was meant to
be lighthearted and appreciative. Z

 

[BBallF]

I think Geno may be looking for a different formula than last season's 'big 3,' and this may mean even more complicated substitution patterns.

Paige Azzi and Sarah scored ~50 ppg, and more like 57 ppg in March. But no one else reached double digits across the season. If this season's 'big 2' can score ~40 ppg and he can get another ~30 ppg from 3 or 4 others, it may be an even better distribution.

Last season, Ash scored 7.7 ppg, Kaitlyn scored 7 ppg and KK scored 5.5. If Serah Ash KK and Kayleigh provide those extra 30 ppg I think Geno will be pleased. Throw in whatever Blanca can do and we're looking at a powerful scoring punch.

Ultimately I think Geno will go with the best formula available but I am sure he would prefer a third or fourth consistent scorer. I think that was the hope/expectation for Serah and/or Blanca. The problem with a Big 2 is that in a given game, one of them can be off, get into serious foul trouble, or get shut down by doubling. Then you have a lot more to make up. Paige did not have a great semifinals or finals but she didn't have to because Sarah and Azzi did. The more I think about this the more I realize that defense will be so very important this year if our point production is down. One of the reasons why I love the press for this team because you get points off of your defense.

 

[BBallF]

I follow your replies to multiple threats and always enjoy
your insights. GO K9 ! Go Huskies! My comment was meant to
be lighthearted and appreciative. Z

I took it that way so rest assured. She is rapidly becoming a favorite of mine. I love a kid who plays like she was taught the game by somebody "old school". She definitely was. Watch how she times her cuts and finds open lanes and seams in the defense. If she can hit her 3s with some regularity it will have the same impact this year that it did for KC last year.

 

[hoophuskee]

PER is not tractable to be spliced into a rotations analysis (a cohort statistics exercise). One can use others, such as EFFiciency, PIE, NETRTG, +/-, PTS/p, etc.

I did a rotations analysis last year using play-by-play info (example here — I’ll do one when Blanca is healthy). It became clear that maximizing winning NCAAT games is not simply rank ordering rotations by some filter over a given evaluation period. It is all about rank ordering different rotations sequences that maximize winning time combinations.

Small ball last year was Geno’s winning time combination. Yet he did not make it his starting lineup. He described it as cat-mouse in the UCLA game. It’s effective when he uses it after he has taken measure of what the opponent has game-planned for that game after already tiring them out.

Last year, the winning time combinations were: the (Big 3 + Ash) + one of {Kaitlyn, KK}.

This year, because of the potency of various lineups and that this team is a returning champ with a potential trajectory better than last year’s zero-to-South Carolina ramp (after losing their secret scrimmage), winning time combinations are potentially more varied. I am hypothesizing that winning time combinations will be something like:

(Azzi, Sarah) + 2 or 3 or 1 of (Serah, Ash, Blanca) + 1 or 0 or 2 of (KK, Kayleigh).

Anything else is a bridge rotation (e.g. to give Azzi and Sarah rest for a long season and for farm system development). Aside: I think the rotation size — players that Geno trusts to play in competitive minutes of games — is 10/11.

I know it’s one game. But the 1Q of the Louisville game demonstrated spurtability from the starting lineup (it already is a winning time combination from the jump).

Great post. First off PER is overrated.

Secondly, the common formulua for success is that you have at least one super player. The super player dictates how the game is to be played. If you have more than one, then they help increase the team''s floor and ceiling immenselyy becuase they allow the tier 2 and tier 3 palyers to stay more within their comfort zone.

So, keeping in mind that the object of the game is to win , then the proven formula that many teams that have won have used is to extend the tier 1 player(s) as many minutes as they can in big games (keeping in mind that big centers might not be able to extend as long). And by playing them more, they make other players better. The whole logical idea behind calling a player "super" (in which UCONN has 2), is that they make other players better. So, even from a learning perspetive, playing good teams like Louisville, there is no reason to not give Sarah and Azzi big minutes. Not only the need to ensure the win, but for the core players Geno feels he can rely on, get used to playing with the tier 1 palyers. which resuluts in an exxpectation that a certain chemsitry evolves.

And as you have accuratey assessed, this UCONN team has already estblaished a winning combination of 6 with imo the curcial 2 of Sarah and Azzi. And with a follow-up of having an elite big-time coach, the inferred probbaility that other playes will rise, even if it is just 1, makes this 1st game a tremendous jump while establishing a solid/elite combination. .

 

[DefenseBB]

We need a nickname for Serah. Too hard for my old brain to keep track of Sarahs.

SS and SW

 

[NycUcWbbFan]

For those interested.