Nika now most important player

[BobbyJ]

My salient point is that I allow experience, whether in the form of eye tests or data, to determine what I believe and not the other way around. Using what you believe to determine what you see or what data you value exposes why the eye test can be abused just as surely as stats can. People’s a priori beliefs determines what they see, thus their eyes cannot be trusted.

I do not see, nor attempt to use, debates as contests to be won or lost. Rather, in their best forms I see them as negotiations to arrive at the truth, or at least consensus. I have no difference of opinion with those who think Fudd is a better all around player, so no negotiation is necessary to persuade me of that.

I see no evidence of Fudd being a better PG. There are declarations being made, most without any evidence of all, but a few like you declare she is a better passer. The evidence you gave was the eye test, but my eye test differs from yours, leaving the possibility in my mind that what you already believe is influencing what you see.

I offer data to counter that, considering that when not abused data does not suffer from the biases of an eye test. I did not use assist totals, because that is an unfair comparison considering what their roles were. Of course Muhl should compile a lot more assists, as that was more her job to have them, but perhaps Fudd could have chocked up the assists just as effectively if that were her role.

But there is not a good reason for Fudd’s A/T being 0.45 less than Muhl’s, other than she is not as good at taking care of the ball, a pretty important quality for a PG. But as I view “debates” as negotiations rather than contests, I am open to changing my mind based on new data. That is why I brought up AAU and European stats. If the stats reveal that Fudd’s A/T took a serious dive transitioning to UConn basketball, then I am willing to at least entertain the idea that Fudd is not innately worse than Muhl at taking care of the ball, but rather she needs to adjust more.

Still, Fudd only has a few months to either learn, or regain, a better ability of taking care of the ball, whereas Muhl has been in training for precisely this role for many years. It’s also possible that Muhl’s A/T dipped from European ball, her ability to make a lay up on a drive certainly has, and she has potential she needs to regain as well, rather than learn from scratch.

Generally, when I get the sense that a person views debates as only contests to win or lose I bow out. Negotiating to get at the truth or consensus is fruitless with such people. It could be they feel their self-esteem damaged if they don’t “win” a debate. Despite your reliance on the eye test only, usually a dangerous sign, I have not got that sense with you. Thus I continued to debate, though with a different objective than you apparently think I have.

Another interesting factor to toss into the subject of ball security would be to look at how Auriemma viewed Muhl's last season. A big part of a PGs job is not only to take care of the ball but also be available to. In arguably the 5 most important games of the year, the last 5 NC tournament games, Auriemma chose not to put the ball in Muhl's hands beyond 11.8 mpg. And in the Indiana game, even if he had wanted to he couldn't because she managed to pick up 4 fouls in her 11 minutes on the floor. So beyond her lack of scoring, the coach didn't view her passing and ball security as enough to play her major minutes. Because he knows he needs a lot of points to beat good teams and the offense didn't function at it's best with her on the floor. That's why I say, never mind what Auriemma says, watch what he does.

 

[diggerfoot]

Another interesting factor to toss into the subject of ball security would be to look at how Auriemma viewed Muhl's last season. A big part of a PGs job is not only to take care of the ball but also be available to. In arguably the 5 most important games of the year, the last 5 NC tournament games, Auriemma chose not to put the ball in Muhl's hands beyond 11.8 mpg. And in the Indiana game, even if he had wanted to he couldn't because she managed to pick up 4 fouls in her 11 minutes on the floor. So beyond her lack of scoring, the coach didn't view her passing and ball security as enough to play her major minutes. Because he knows he needs a lot of points to beat good teams and the offense didn't function at it's best with her on the floor. That's why I say, never mind what Auriemma says, watch what he does.

This is changing the discussion. With Bueckers and Westbrook available in the tournament, the only reason Auriemma would be concerned about PG minutes for Muhl is to not overuse Bueckers. If Bueckers was available now we would not be having this discussion at all. When Bueckers was not available last year Muhl’s PG minutes went up, why would you not think the same to be true this coming year? Last year when Fudd, Ducharme and Muhl were the three guards on the floor together who generally played PG? Why should that change this year?

One reason could be what you bring up, Muhl’s tendency to foul. That could indeed hold her back and limit her minutes. Note that I never claimed with certainty that she was going to get major PG minutes, but I do claim it is bad news if she doesn’t. You say go by what Auriemma does. If the guards he puts on the floor are Fudd, Ducharme and Muhl, Auriemma already has demonstrated by his actions he wants Muhl as PG. The same was true if you swap C. Williams for Fudd or Ducharme.

Honestly, the best case you could make is that Senechal might be more suited for PG, of which I have no idea. But by your own criteria of Auriemma’s actions he has consistently chosen Muhl over Fudd and Ducharme as PG when using those three together.

 

[diggerfoot]

@diggerfoot, you’re absolutely right about one thing, beliefs do influence how we experience things, and this is true of me for sure. For example, I have a few friends who hate the Patriots, insist on calling them the Cheatriots. Naturally they’re Steelers fans. We can watch the same game and see very different things. This is one of the reasons I enjoy talking football with them.

Data can correct for these variations, and used well can raise the level of a conversation. But it does not as often enhance the mutual enjoyment of those conversations, since their main virtue is not accuracy.

This may mean the best use of data is as the starting point, not as the basis of a refutation, as you say. Like the one you started us with: why does Azzi have fewer assists, or a worse a/t ratio and yet seems so much more valuable a player to many of us? A similar question could be asked about Caroline. One thing we might ask is whether a single data point like a/t ratio captures the reality of the game flow. Were all the turnovers live ball turnovers? Every turnover costs us a possession, but they don’t all weigh the same in the result. Some directly cost a score, some lead directly to an opponent scoring, and so on. Other stats may capture this sort of difference better than a/t.

Caroline made a bunch of turnovers in her first several games. But she was also frequently the team’s savior. Situationally, those turnovers were disappointing and I hope she’ll improve in this area, but I was happy to trade them for everything else she contributed. I don’t have a stat for how many possessions were wasted without a turnover, because we were forced into a bad shot by poor passing from the point or poor execution of a motion offense. But I know there were quite a few from experience.

In the first DePaul game, the team was outhustled, and outplayed in the post by Morrow, and I’m sure Geno didn’t want it to come down to the a last second shot. But when it did, he wanted Caroline to take the last shot and she did it, thank goodness! In the rematch, we practically ran DePaul off the court even though Caroline didn’t play and Azzi shot poorly. It is not hard to see why after the fact in a few stats like points in the paint and points off turnovers. That’s what the change in “hustle” produced, I guess. But I still like our chances better with Azzi and Caroline on the floor the next time we play them.

Your question seems to assume the PG should be the most valuable player, which I guess is because of what started the thread. But the started PG does not have to be the most valuable player, does not have to be the best player, does not even have to be one of the players you want on the floor in the last minute. She needs to be the one who can best facilitate the offense for most of the game.

I took another look at Fudd’s assist totals, not to compare them with either Muhl or Bueckers, which would be unfair, but all the other guards besides them. Fudd’s assists per minute were the lowest …. by far! It’s not hard to understand why, she is the primary target to be set up, not to set others up. Fudd has shown the least inclination of being the facilitator needed for PG out of all the choices, whether by nature or design, yet people automatically think her being the best all around player naturally makes her the best PG.

Fudd is talented enough so she could possibly be trained as a great PG, but there are only a few months to do it and it would only be a temporary solution. Without that investment, Fudd really is not a logical choice for the PG position. At this point I would be more interested in hearing reasons why Senechal or even Ducharme might usurp Muhl’s minutes as a PG.

 

[sun]

Fudd is talented enough so she could possibly be trained as a great PG, but there are only a few months to do it and it would only be a temporary solution. Without that investment, Fudd really is not a logical choice for the PG position. At this point I would be more interested in hearing reasons why Senechal or even Ducharme might usurp Muhl’s minutes as a PG.

Because the team needs to be prepared by having a back up PG.
The team can't rely on only having a single PG can it?
Why does there need to be any other reason besides because it makes sense to have more than one PG?
Things don't need to be that complicated unless folks don't want to admit that we need more than one PG.
This isn't about putting a particular player first, it's about putting the team first.
A new PG needs to be trained, maybe 2 more for obvious reasons.
That can result in splitting up Nika's PT.

 

[BobbyJ]

This is changing the discussion. With Bueckers and Westbrook available in the tournament, the only reason Auriemma would be concerned about PG minutes for Muhl is to not overuse Bueckers. If Bueckers was available now we would not be having this discussion at all. When Bueckers was not available last year Muhl’s PG minutes went up, why would you not think the same to be true this coming year? Last year when Fudd, Ducharme and Muhl were the three guards on the floor together who generally played PG? Why should that change this year?

One reason could be what you bring up, Muhl’s tendency to foul. That could indeed hold her back and limit her minutes. Note that I never claimed with certainty that she was going to get major PG minutes, but I do claim it is bad news if she doesn’t. You say go by what Auriemma does. If the guards he puts on the floor are Fudd, Ducharme and Muhl, Auriemma already has demonstrated by his actions he wants Muhl as PG. The same was true if you swap C. Williams for Fudd or Ducharme.

Honestly, the best case you could make is that Senechal might be more suited for PG, of which I have no idea. But by your own criteria of Auriemma’s actions he has consistently chosen Muhl over Fudd and Ducharme as PG when using those three together.

1st bolded: I would agree with this however, I'm not sure how highly Auriemma rates Muhl's offensive PG skills. If he felt that they were strong enough that his offense ran at it's best with her on the floor, he could've used Bueckers at SG which is where some people seem to think is the best use of her, freeing her to hunt shots. Could've have rested Bueckers more and rotated the other SGs. But he knew that wouldn't enhance and make his offense better.
2nd bolded: That was obviously by default. And usually for limited minutes and I don't remember seeing those 3 in those 5 NC tourney games together. Must have been in the hodge podge lineups during the regular season. Ducharme has no PG skills and he needed Fudd at SG for the obvious reason, it wasn't going to be Muhl. Yes, you would think that Muhl's minutes would go up this year if all these supposed offseason improvements have taken place. But maybe not. That's why we're all waiting to see what she's got. But I know Auriemma won't hand it to her before exploring all his options.

 

[diggerfoot]

Because the team needs to be prepared by having a back up PG.
The team can't rely on only having a single PG can it?
Why does there need to be any other reason besides because it makes sense to have more than one PG?
Things don't need to be that complicated unless folks don't want to admit that we need more than one PG.
This isn't about putting a particular player first, it's about putting the team first.
A new PG needs to be trained, maybe 2 more for obvious reasons.
That can result in splitting up Nika's PT.

Part of the training is Auriemma saying “if anything goes wrong it’s your fault.” I agree there can and should be more than one person prepared to put minutes in at the point. Obviously, even if Muhl turns out fantastic, she is not going to play the whole game. The psychological preparation of “this is your offense to run,” at least historically, is targeted for one.

 

[diggerfoot]

1st bolded: I would agree with this however, I'm not sure how highly Auriemma rates Muhl's offensive PG skills. If he felt that they were strong enough that his offense ran at it's best with her on the floor, he could've used Bueckers at SG which is where some people seem to think is the best use of her, freeing her to hunt shots. Could've have rested Bueckers more and rotated the other SGs. But he knew that wouldn't enhance and make his offense better.
2nd bolded: That was obviously by default. And usually for limited minutes and I don't remember seeing those 3 in those 5 NC tourney games together. Must have been in the hodge podge lineups during the regular season. Ducharme has no PG skills and he needed Fudd at SG for the obvious reason, it wasn't going to be Muhl. Yes, you would think that Muhl's minutes would go up this year if all these supposed offseason improvements have taken place. But maybe not. That's why we're all waiting to see what she's got. But I know Auriemma won't hand it to her before exploring all his options.

This has dragged on long enough. I do not believe you are really addressing my points head on right now, but more like looking to circumvent them.

Do you live in Connecticut? I will bet you a large pizza that Muhl gets more minutes at PG than Fudd. Deal?

 

[Bone Dog]

Obviously, even if Muhl turns out fantastic, she is not going to play the whole game.

I completely agree with this observation. But I want to pull your leg a bit, if that’s okay.

“Where’s your evidence for this?What data?”

We could probably gin up some statistics, or we could rely on what our eyes tell us. Players need a break, and even Nika will, and Azzi and Caroline absolutely will. If Lou and Nika (with a little help from Ayanna and Aubrey) can play more than 50 mins between them, that means Azzi and Caroline won’t have to play 35 mins/game. Experience tells me that’s a good thing.

 

[BobbyJ]

Lol. And Muhl’s own chaos, also with injury and adjusting to our style of basketball, is not a factor in her performance?

I get it. If UConn played truly positionless basketball across all five positions, Muhl would not be one of the five starters, and would not even be one of the five most important players, let alone most important player.

But PG is a specialized role even within the UConn system, which involves directing the offense with a minimum of mistakes. Muhl has been and will continue to be trained specifically for that role. No one else besides Bueckers was being trained for that, and if Bueckers was here this year, or with Arnold next year, you can bet Fudd would not be groomed for it.

I included your quote because in your objection to Muhl not being one of the most important you supported that with saying Muhl is not a better passer than Fudd. If true, the proof lies in your faith in Fudd’s abilities and not on what has been actually demonstrated. Making excuses for her ”chaos” does not suffice as real evidence in support of what you believe.

So once again, it may be that Muhl plays a lesser role this year while Fudd handles a significant part of the PG duties, but if that happens that is not good news for UConn. Any program would want to first and foremost to groom and keep giving experience to Fudd as a SG or playing “positionless,” with some amount of confidence she will be the best in the country in that role, allowed to blossom that way by continuing to use a person specifically groomed for PG in that position. If they can’t do that and have to use Fudd or anyone else in the PG role, destined to only be a temporary fix, that has both short term and long term consequences for the program.

I went back in your posts and if I'm not wrong, the bolded area seems to be your main point. My point mainly is that if Muhl handles a significant part of the PG duties, that is not good news for UConn to reach their highest potential this season (say FF). As I've said, using Fudd there is not ideal but TO ME it's the better alternative based on the reasons I've given. If Auriemma decides to go with Muhl, so be it, you'd be correct. I'm just saying that would not be my choice. And no, I'm not in Conn.

 

[diggerfoot]

I went back in your posts and if I'm not wrong, the bolded area seems to be your main point. My point mainly is that if Muhl handles a significant part of the PG duties, that is not good news for UConn to reach their highest potential this season (say FF). As I've said, using Fudd there is not ideal but TO ME it's the better alternative based on the reasons I've given. If Auriemma decides to go with Muhl, so be it, you'd be correct. I'm just saying that would not be my choice. And no, I'm not in Conn.

Ah, thanks, that clarifies your position for me, it’s not exactly what I thought, and perhaps explains why this has dragged on.

Playing Fudd at PG to me is not a better option unless Muhl can’t stay in the game, or resists instruction. Fudd would be playing out of position for something she may not even be psychologically suited for, let alone her problematic A/T and sparsity of assists over all.

All along you’ve said that players have to earn things with Auriemma, yet you think he may give Muhl the major minutes even if that proves to be bad news? By logical inference that would mean Fudd would be even worse at PG, so he’s stuck with Muhl regardless. I’m a little more optimistic about both Muhl and Fudd to come to that conclusion, so I guess we agree to disagree at this point.

 

[Bone Dog]

I went back in your posts and if I'm not wrong, the bolded area seems to be your main point. My point mainly is that if Muhl handles a significant part of the PG duties, that is not good news for UConn to reach their highest potential this season (say FF). As I've said, using Fudd there is not ideal but TO ME it's the better alternative based on the reasons I've given. If Auriemma decides to go with Muhl, so be it, you'd be correct. I'm just saying that would not be my choice. And no, I'm not in Conn.

I go back and forth on this. With Nika at point we can play a lineup like Azzi and Caroline at sg and sf, and Aaliyah and Dorka at pf and c. This lineup makes sense, though it looks a little “plain vanilla.” It’s big across the front with 6’2” 6’3” and 6’5” and not too slow with Nika and Azzi at the perimeter. We can play some tough D with this lineup.

Similarly, we can play 4-or even 5-out with Nika at point, and we might not want to do that with Azzi at point. When I think about a lineup like Nika Azzi Caroline Lou and Aaliyah/Ice, I can’t help thinking how scary that would be for opponents. Not too small with 6’2” 6’1” 6’3” across the front, and a lot of quickness and lights out perimeter shooting.

We might be able to run a 4-out set without Nika for a little while. Azzi Caroline Lou Ayanna and Dorka/Aaliyah/Amari/Aubrey. We don’t lose much on offense with those shooters, and our D may be quick enough if Aubrey’s in.

But the plain vanilla lineup without Nika would probably be Azzi Caroline Lou Aaliyah Dorka. This looks like the main option with Azzi at point, and I think it could be really effective. It loses a little something in quickness, but on offense it will be formidable.

As I say, I think we can run various lineups without Nika. But they don’t strike me really better than the ones with her at point. And the fatigue factor means we need to have at least some minutes from her. I’d guess at least 20.

 

[Alydar]

Mühl has 2 years experience at UConn, has started games and while not a scorer by nature she made major contributions in both of her 1st 2 years. And we have Fudd, who is a 2 due to her prolific scoring abilities, not her shortcomings at the point and is perfectly able to play pg. Not her best spot nor UConn's best use of her but available. There are 100 posts of concern up to this one and it has been discussed elsewhere. And yet over on the non-UConn forum SCar fans seem perfectly OK with either a grad portal transfer or a redshirt freshman starting at pg. I'm following their lead.

If Mühl had been playing mop up minutes for 2 years there would be reason for concern but she was making valuable contributions as a freshman and now she's a junior. UConn is lucky to have such a good backup. An AA pg is coming next year. And another is coming back as a redshirt junior.

 

[BobbyJ]

Ah, thanks, that clarifies your position for me, it’s not exactly what I thought, and perhaps explains why this has dragged on.

Playing Fudd at PG to me is not a better option unless Muhl can’t stay in the game, or resists instruction. Fudd would be playing out of position for something she may not even be psychologically suited for, let alone her problematic A/T and sparsity of assists over all.

All along you’ve said that players have to earn things with Auriemma, yet you think he may give Muhl the major minutes even if that proves to be bad news? By logical inference that would mean Fudd would be even worse at PG, so he’s stuck with Muhl regardless. I’m a little more optimistic about both Muhl and Fudd to come to that conclusion, so I guess we agree to disagree at this point.

He may consider it earned if he believes she's made the necessary improvements and if he just doesn't want to move Fudd. But if he does to start the season, it may IMO turn out to be a short leash and then a job by committee. Looks like it could be an ongoing discussion.

 

[Alydar]

I go back and forth on this. With Nika at point we can play a lineup like Azzi and Caroline at sg and sf, and Aaliyah and Dorka at pf and c. This lineup makes sense, though it looks a little “plain vanilla.” It’s big across the front with 6’2” 6’3” and 6’5” and not too slow with Nika and Azzi at the perimeter. We can play some tough D with this lineup.

Similarly, we can play 4-or even 5-out with Nika at point, and we might not want to do that with Azzi at point. When I think about a lineup like Nika Azzi Caroline Lou and Aaliyah/Ice, I can’t help thinking how scary that would be for opponents. Not too small with 6’2” 6’1” 6’3” across the front, and a lot of quickness and lights out perimeter shooting.

We might be able to run a 4-out set without Nika for a little while. Azzi Caroline Lou Ayanna and Dorka/Aaliyah/Amari/Aubrey. We don’t lose much on offense with those shooters, and our D may be quick enough if Aubrey’s in.

But the plain vanilla lineup without Nika would probably be Azzi Caroline Lou Aaliyah Dorka. This looks like the main option with Azzi at point, and I think it could be really effective. It loses a little something in quickness, but on offense it will be formidable.

As I say, I think we can run various lineups without Nika. But they don’t strike me really better than the ones with her at point. And the fatigue factor means we need to have at least some minutes from her. I’d guess at least 20.

If the coaches see that the posts can shoot/make from the outside UConn could play stretches with only 2 guards. 10 minutes a game over the course of the season would help keep the guards fresh.

 

[Bone Dog]

And yet over on the non-UConn forum SCar fans seem perfectly OK with either a grad portal transfer or a redshirt freshman starting at pg. I'm following their lead.

I’m not. In fact, this is why I think SCar will have some tough games this year. They won a lot of games last year on D, and their O stalled especially when Henderson was out. They’ll be tough because their D will still be excellent. But pg is going to be a problem for them, make no mistake about it.

Yes, Nika has 2 years of D1 experience. But she’s not a premier pg unless she ups her offensive game. Now, I think she’ll do just that and we’ll see an improved Nina in the fall. But as always, here’s my mantra, “only time will tell.”

 

[BobbyJ]

I go back and forth on this. With Nika at point we can play a lineup like Azzi and Caroline at sg and sf, and Aaliyah and Dorka at pf and c. This lineup makes sense, though it looks a little “plain vanilla.” It’s big across the front with 6’2” 6’3” and 6’5” and not too slow with Nika and Azzi at the perimeter. We can play some tough D with this lineup.

Similarly, we can play 4-or even 5-out with Nika at point, and we might not want to do that with Azzi at point. When I think about a lineup like Nika Azzi Caroline Lou and Aaliyah/Ice, I can’t help thinking how scary that would be for opponents. Not too small with 6’2” 6’1” 6’3” across the front, and a lot of quickness and lights out perimeter shooting.

We might be able to run a 4-out set without Nika for a little while. Azzi Caroline Lou Ayanna and Dorka/Aaliyah/Amari/Aubrey. We don’t lose much on offense with those shooters, and our D may be quick enough if Aubrey’s in.

But the plain vanilla lineup without Nika would probably be Azzi Caroline Lou Aaliyah Dorka. This looks like the main option with Azzi at point, and I think it could be really effective. It loses a little something in quickness, but on offense it will be formidable.

As I say, I think we can run various lineups without Nika. But they don’t strike me really better than the ones with her at point. And the fatigue factor means we need to have at least some minutes from her. I’d guess at least 20.

Sounds reasonable. However, beyond PG, a bigger concern for me despite having the size will be the interior defense. I don't know if they have quality over quantity while waiting for the two freshmen to develop. Of course that's for a separate thread.

 

[Alydar]

He may consider it earned if he believes she's made the necessary improvements and if he just doesn't want to move Fudd. But if he does to start the season, it may IMO turn out to be a short leash and then a job by committee. Looks like it could be an ongoing discussion.

In 2021 Geno was forced to move Bueckers from her best position because of a lack of scoring. If Mühl can't handle the point he would be doing the same in reverse. Mühl is going to have to regress for that to happen.

 

[Alydar]

I’m not. In fact, this is why I think SCar will have some tough games this year. They won a lot of games last year on D, and their O stalled especially when Henderson was out. They’ll be tough because their D will still be excellent. But pg is going to be a problem for them, make no mistake about it.

Yes, Nika has 2 years of D1 experience. But she’s not a premier pg unless she ups her offensive game. Now, I think she’ll do just that and we’ll see an improved Nina in the fall. But as always, here’s my mantra, “only time will tell.”

2 years at UConn, playing meaningful minutes. She is less than Bueckers but so is everyone else.

She will have Bueckers to get her ready for every game and coaching her during games.

 

[TeamFirst!]

SC has Raven Johnson, a former #2 prospect, coming in who looked solid in the little time she did get to play last year. And their transfer PG is also a proven commodity. I don't have a "problem" with Nika at PG. I'm just saying our best lineup probably has Azzi as the PG, Lou as the 2 and Caroline at 3. We clearly need Nika though and she probably even starts. The best area of improvement for this team, IMO, is cutting down the turnoves and I think Azzi generally makes solid decisions with the ball and can break down an opposing team off the dribble better than Nika.

 

[Bone Dog]

SC has Raven Johnson, a former #2 prospect, coming in who looked solid in the little time she did get to play last year. And their transfer PG is also a proven commodity. I don't have a "problem" with Nika at PG. I'm just saying our best lineup probably has Azzi as the PG, Lou as the 2 and Caroline at 3. We clearly need Nika though and she probably even starts. The best area of improvement for this team, IMO, is cutting down the turnoves and I think Azzi generally makes solid decisions with the ball and can break down an opposing team off the dribble better than Nika.

What you say is reasonable. I’d underline this:

“We clearly need Nika though and she probably even starts.”

We have 120 mins to fill at 1-3. We can’t do that with just Azzi Caroline and Lou. Apart from the question what’s the best lineup, etc., those three will not be able to play 40mins/g. It’s a question whether Lou will even be able to play 20 if her D isn’t up to it. I hope she is. And maybe Aubrey or Ayanna can cover a few minutes at the 3 though our scoring will suffer.

This is just arithmetic. I was about to say it’s just physics, lol. Even if Nika doesn’t improve at all from last year, we’ll still need some minutes from her, perhaps a minimum of 20.

 

[Cuango]

I believe Fudd’s A/T ratio was close to 1, perhaps below that. Muhl’s was about half a point higher, about the same as Westbrook’s. When was the last time Auriemma put his trust in a PG with a sub A/T ratio?

You can believe Fudd can be the PG based faith in her abilities, but the empirical evidence does not support her being a starting PG for a UConn quality team.

on Edit: I’ll reiterate this. It could be that Muhl plays a lesser role this year and we start a PG with a historical A/T below 1. But if that happens it is not a good sign for UConn.

Agreed! This incessant attempt to elevate Nika to a status she has in no way earned on the court has always been a great puzzlement! Yes! She is scrappy, energetic, and an effective defender! However, that’s about it. She is very ineffective on offense, a poor shooter, an average (at best) passer, and a woeful free throw shooter. Even so, I’m glad she’s on our team, but to picture her as “most important”, best (at anything), or somehow, indispensable to the overall success of our team would require ignoring most of the evidence at hand. Could she come back as a vastly improved player? Possibly, but I think it’s far more likely that she will have improved at a more modest level. If she can force the other team to actively guard her, improve her ast/to ratio, up her free throws to 70+, and reduce her predilection for fouling, I will be extremely happy.

 

[Cuango]

Lol. And Muhl’s own chaos, also with injury and adjusting to our style of basketball, is not a factor in her performance?

I get it. If UConn played truly positionless basketball across all five positions, Muhl would not be one of the five starters, and would not even be one of the five most important players, let alone most important player.

But PG is a specialized role even within the UConn system, which involves directing the offense with a minimum of mistakes. Muhl has been and will continue to be trained specifically for that role. No one else besides Bueckers was being trained for that, and if Bueckers was here this year, or with Arnold next year, you can bet Fudd would not be groomed for it.

I included your quote because in your objection to Muhl not being one of the most important you supported that with saying Muhl is not a better passer than Fudd. If true, the proof lies in your faith in Fudd’s abilities and not on what has been actually demonstrated. Making excuses for her ”chaos” does not suffice as real evidence in support of what you believe.

So once again, it may be that Muhl plays a lesser role this year while Fudd handles a significant part of the PG duties, but if that happens that is not good news for UConn. Any program would want to first and foremost to groom and keep giving experience to Fudd as a SG or playing “positionless,” with some amount of confidence she will be the best in the country in that role, allowed to blossom that way by continuing to use a person specifically groomed for PG in that position. If they can’t do that and have to use Fudd or anyone else in the PG role, destined to only be a temporary fix, that has both short term and long term consequences for the program.

I tend to agree that Azzi at SG would seem to be the ideal. However, I would also point out that we are talking about a player who has been favorably compared to Paige, a player I am increasingly convinced is the best I’ve ever seen play! While I don’t agree with that comparison, there is no doubt that Fudd is a truly gifted player. With Paige being injured relatively early in the off-season Fudd will have had three or four months to prepare for her new duties at the point. Given her talent level and the needs of the team, I believe we are going to be pretty impressed with her point guard play. The big thing we all need to pray/hope for is good health!

 

[Bone Dog]

I agree that Azzi could be a talented point guard. In fact, in ordinary circumstances I might want her at point even with Paige on the floor. But right now, we only have 4 potential guards, and if Azzi is the exclusive point guard, there is no role for Nika and then we’re down to 3 guards. That doesn’t seem like a sustainable situation. This means Nika will have to play point in order to have any minutes. Like the rest of us, I’m aware of her limitations. I hope she can grow out of some of them. But this where we are.

Here’s another way to think of it. Azzi reminds me of KML. She has a lot of the same skills, is not quite as tall but quite a bit quicker. KML could have played point — she was certainly capable of scoring off the dribble and passing. But it would have seemed strange to all of us to have her do so. With greater quickness and maybe better handles, Azzi would be even better at point, and circumstances are likely to force her to. But we will all feel the cost of not having her as free to shoot 3s.

 

[diggerfoot]

To no one in particular:

PG is a specialized role even in the UConn system. As such it requires both tangible and intangible qualities.

Even when playing off guard Bueckers nevertheless compiles assists and minimizes turnovers, the same could be said for Taurasi. Fudd may prove to be an all time great in terms of talent and value to the team, but it’s already proven she is no Bueckers or Taurasi in terms of facilitating offense from the SG position. You would not think Moore should be considered for PG in a pinch, being great does not mean being great at everything. Nothing has shown to date that Fudd would be great at PG, at least not without some significant coaching.

I agree Muhl has some issues to overcome, and may or may not do so. But I entered this fray once people started faulting her passing, or elevating Fudd’s, as a means of questioning her importance, or whether she will be our PG. Neither the eye test nor the stats favor Fudd over Muhl in the passing department.

Furthermore, Muhl has prepared for the psychological/intangible aspects of being the PG for six years. Indeed, this may be why her assist related stats are so much better than Fudd’s, not because of talent, but because of all the grooming that is behind creating a good PG. Maybe with enough grooming Fudd could facilitate offense as well or better than Muhl, but on the other hand she may not have the right disposition. Anyone can see she does not have the same disposition as Bueckers to facilitate offense while Muhl, because of her years of grooming, does have that disposition.

”Average passer at best?” My Lord, there’s enough eye test material just from UConn to refute that, but I recommend watching some of her European footage. “Average passer?” wtf. Question her value or likelihood to be PG based on missed lay ups, foul shooting, hesitancy to shoot, or propensity to commit fouls. I agree there is plenty of material to work with. But taking her comparative strength and claiming it to be her weakness in comparison to Fudd is straight out of Propaganda 101. We get enough of that these days.

Lol, @Bone Dog , how is that as an impassioned plea for you?

 

[Bone Dog]

To no one in particular:

PG is a specialized role even in the UConn system. As such it requires both tangible and intangible qualities.

Even when playing off guard Bueckers nevertheless compiles assists and minimizes turnovers, the same could be said for Taurasi. Fudd may prove to be an all time great in terms of talent and value to the team, but it’s already proven she is no Bueckers or Taurasi in terms of facilitating offense from the SG position. You would not think Moore should be considered for PG in a pinch, being great does not mean being great at everything. Nothing has shown to date that Fudd would be great at PG, at least not without some significant coaching.

I agree Muhl has some issues to overcome, and may or may not do so. But I entered this fray once people started faulting her passing, or elevating Fudd’s, as a means of questioning her importance, or whether she will be our PG. Neither the eye test nor the stats favor Fudd over Muhl in the passing department.

Furthermore, Muhl has prepared for the psychological/intangible aspects of being the PG for six years. Indeed, this may be why her assist related stats are so much better than Fudd’s, not because of talent, but because of all the grooming that is behind creating a good PG. Maybe with enough grooming Fudd could facilitate offense as well or better than Muhl, but on the other hand she may not have the right disposition. Anyone can see she does not have the same disposition as Bueckers to facilitate offense while Muhl, because of her years of grooming, does have that disposition.

”Average passer at best?” My Lord, there’s enough eye test material just from UConn to refute that, but I recommend watching some of her European footage. “Average passer?” wtf. Question her value or likelihood to be PG based on missed lay ups, foul shooting, hesitancy to shoot, or propensity to commit fouls. I agree there is plenty of material to work with. But taking her comparative strength and claiming it to be her weakness in comparison to Fudd is straight out of Propaganda 101. We get enough of that these days.

Lol, @Bone Dog , how is that as an impassioned plea for you?

That was me trying to be reasonable. As you can see, I’m not that good at it. But I’m glad to see some passion in your recent posts. Defend Nika!

 

[Beemer]

2 years at UConn, playing meaningful minutes. She is less than Bueckers but so is everyone else.

She will have Bueckers to get her ready for every game and coaching her during games.

Having Paige there to help Nika could be the X factor. Back in the dark ages when I played HS softball I would listen to my coaches but a lot of times it helped even more when a teammate pointed something out to me during a game- real time coaching as it were. The coaching staff can't see everything & Paige is incredibly smart and alert out there.

 

[Bone Dog]

Having Paige there to help Nika could be the X factor. Back in the dark ages when I played HS softball I would listen to my coaches but a lot of times it helped even more when a teammate pointed something out to me during a game- real time coaching as it were. The coaching staff can't see everything & Paige is incredibly smart and alert out there.

Plus Paige and Nika have that whole twins thing going. Twins often communicate in mysterious ways

 

[CocoHusky]

To no one in particular:

PG is a specialized role even in the UConn system. As such it requires both tangible and intangible qualities.

Even when playing off guard Bueckers nevertheless compiles assists and minimizes turnovers, the same could be said for Taurasi. Fudd may prove to be an all time great in terms of talent and value to the team, but it’s already proven she is no Bueckers or Taurasi in terms of facilitating offense from the SG position. You would not think Moore should be considered for PG in a pinch, being great does not mean being great at everything. Nothing has shown to date that Fudd would be great at PG, at least not without some significant coaching.

I agree Muhl has some issues to overcome, and may or may not do so. But I entered this fray once people started faulting her passing, or elevating Fudd’s, as a means of questioning her importance, or whether she will be our PG. Neither the eye test nor the stats favor Fudd over Muhl in the passing department.

Furthermore, Muhl has prepared for the psychological/intangible aspects of being the PG for six years. Indeed, this may be why her assist related stats are so much better than Fudd’s, not because of talent, but because of all the grooming that is behind creating a good PG. Maybe with enough grooming Fudd could facilitate offense as well or better than Muhl, but on the other hand she may not have the right disposition. Anyone can see she does not have the same disposition as Bueckers to facilitate offense while Muhl, because of her years of grooming, does have that disposition.

”Average passer at best?” My Lord, there’s enough eye test material just from UConn to refute that, but I recommend watching some of her European footage. “Average passer?” wtf. Question her value or likelihood to be PG based on missed lay ups, foul shooting, hesitancy to shoot, or propensity to commit fouls. I agree there is plenty of material to work with. But taking her comparative strength and claiming it to be her weakness in comparison to Fudd is straight out of Propaganda 101. We get enough of that these days.

Lol, @Bone Dog , how is that as an impassioned plea for you?

Paige and DT are awful tall bars by which to measure any playmaking SG because each also managed to win Liberman Award as the best PG in the country. The PG position has evolved at all levels of basketball to a position which values scoring more than it does passing. Ari McDonald did not have a single assist in the Arizona FF game against UCONN, but she put up 26 points. Destini Henderson had 4 assist in the championship game and she also managed to put up 26 points. Hardly anyone talks about Stephen Curry assists numbers but he is a constant MVP candidate. Courtney Vandersloot has led the WNBA in assists in 5 of the last 6 seasons as was never in serious contention for a spot on the USA basketball national team. For UCONN specifically and among the players like Nika that who were restricted to playing the PG position only ( Jenn Rizzotti Sue Bird, Renee Montgomery, Moriah Jefferson, Crystal Dangerfield) were all double digit scorers as the UCONN starting PG.

So if I'm going to pick a side here I would side with Azzi as the starter because the PG position (all positions ) at UCONN requires you to do three major things (pass, defend & score ) at high levels. IMO Azzi does the "combination" of these three things at a higher level than Nika and should get the nod as the Starting PG. To be perfectly transparent for me it does come down to the scoring deficiency on the part of Nika, which is very hard for me to write because of how much I value defense.

If Nika's European passing efficiency is to be submitted as evidence of Nika's passing prowess then so should Azzi Fudd's time at USA basketball 9 (U19, U17, U16) where she was definitely utilized as a play making guard and finished among the teams leaders in assists. In 2021 at U19 Work Cup Azzi finished 3 on the team in assist behind Caitlin Clark and Te-Hina Paopao and ahead of Diamond Johnson.

One of the more confounding things regarding Nika ( see @Cuango last post) is the binary (full or empty) value proposition that is associated with Nika specifically when it regards her starting. The backup PG position is going to be an extremely valuable position for UCONN this season just as it has always been for UCONN for the past several years. Nika's value to the team does not go from 1 (full value) to 0 if she does not start. In fact I'd make the argument that because she is the only game changing perimeter defender on the roster ( with Aubrey recovering from surgery) Nika becomes more value to the team coming off the bench to cool down a hot shooter or change the defensive tempo of the game.

 

[HuskyNan]

Nika is my favorite Husky, so take anything I have to say with a grain of salt.

Nika has shot a little over 34% from three point range in both the 2020-2021 and 2021-2022 seasons. Last season, that percentage was better than the percentages for Christyn, Evina and Caroline. I recognize that those three probably took more contested three pointers, but still worth noting.

As I recall, in both seasons Nika has started slow but picked it up from three point range as the season went along, perhaps as her playing time increased. So I think I would like to see her get off to a quicker start from deep in the coming season and if so, she might get the percentage up to around 38%. I would take that.

It was clear to me from watching her warmup before games (I am a season ticket holder and always try to get there early) that she was working on her midrange game. Her movements were slow and deliberate, almost rehearsed, and it was clear that she had been following through on coaching she had received. She actually had some success from the midrange, not much but some, a little more than the previous year. I saw a video taken earlier this summer, I believe, where she was working on the midrange shots and she looked much more fluid, natural, and comfortable. I am hoping that she continues to progress in that area.

Introducing the three pointer has been an overall positive for basketball, I think, but it has been a negative in terms of players (many, not all) developing a midrange game.

I don`t know if that constant passing off the dribble drive is a European thing or not, but Anna Makurat was guilty of that as well. Nika is certainly capable of finishing at the hoop. I think it is a mindset more than anything else.

Geno certainly doesn`t need my advice, but I hope he would tell her to not worry if she misses a layup, a midrange jumper, or a three pointer. Or all three. You are my point guard, and I want you to take those shots in the flow of the offense. If you miss, you miss. That may help free her up mentally to take those shots.

On the defensive end, I think there will be nights when Nika finds herself in foul trouble. She will be aggressive, at times overly so, and on top of that the refs in WCBB call touch fouls on the perimeter all night while allowing felony assaults in the paint. We have to hope that she is able to stay on the floor in the biggest of games. I`m sure she is aware of this.

My larger concern is that her treating every defensive possession as Armageddon - diving and crashing into things and people after loose balls, rushing from 20 feet away to try and take a charge under the hoop, etc. - is going to catch up to her at some point. I found myself cringing and swearing under my breath at her for throwing herself in harm`s way last season more often than I can count. Difficult to tell the bull in the shop to be careful around the china - but I think she needs to protect herself more while still being Nika.

Something that (I think) has been overlooked in this thread but which I have observed - the offense works well when she is on the floor. Offenses can always get stagnant, but when she is on the floor there seems to be a lot of movement, and open shots are created. That is a benefit that goes beyond any deep dive analysis of her individual skills. Oh, and energy, there is that too, as in she has a whole lot of it and it is contagious.

If everything goes true to form, I would expect her to play about 28-30 minutes a game at the point guard position with Azzi playing more minutes than that, and probably playing the point much of the time Nika is on the bench.

I’m not sure what your definition of “picking it up” means in regards to three point shooting. Nika is hesitant to shoot and that was apparent throughout the season. Yes, there were 6 games mid season where she averaged almost 7 shots a game but there were many more where she has 1 or no shots all game.

I didn’t see the mid-range game either as 63% of Nika’s shots were three point attempts and the majority of the other shots were layups off steals or run outs.

My issue with Nika’s scoring is that there were many games this past season where the team was desperate for points but she just didn’t shoot. It appears to me she simply doesn’t have a scorer’s approach to the game, she is a pass-first guard. Geno telling her she needs to be more of a scoring threat publicly is great but there is no chance he hasn’t said it before, especially when the team was struggling offensively. Why do people think she can change who she is and how she’s played her entire life over one summer?

I absolutely hope that Geno can use his motivational magic and turn Nika into someone that can at least take 8-10 shots a game. I think Nika is important to the team’s psyche, an intangible that gives the team it’s energy. How wonderful it would be to see her become a more complete player and I’m rooting for her to do so. But as someone who’s tried to convince herself that I’m capable of giving up chocolate for the sake of my waistline for decades now, I’m leery of someone changing who they are.

 

[BobbyJ]

I’m not sure what your definition of “picking it up” means in regards to three point shooting. Nika is hesitant to shoot and that was apparent throughout the season. Yes, there were 6 games mid season where she averaged almost 7 shots a game but there were many more where she has 1 or no shots all game.

I didn’t see the mid-range game either as 63% of Nika’s shots were three point attempts and the majority of the other shots were layups off steals or run outs.

My issue with Nika’s scoring is that there were many games this past season where the team was desperate for points but she just didn’t shoot. It appears to me she simply doesn’t have a scorer’s approach to the game, she is a pass-first guard. Geno telling her she needs to be more of a scoring threat publicly is great but there is no chance he hasn’t said it before, especially when the team was struggling offensively. Why do people thing she can change who she is and how she’s played her entire life over one summer?

I absolutely hope that Geno can use his motivational magic and turn Nika into someone that can at least take 8-10 shots a game. I think Nika is important to the team’s psyche, an intangible that gives the team it’s energy. How wonderful it would be to see her become a more complete player and I’m rooting for her to do so. But as someone who’s tried to convince herself that I’m capable of giving up chocolate for the sake of my waistline for decades now, I’m leery of someone changing who they are.

View attachment 78526View attachment 78526

Exactly. And I'll add that a player this deep into their BB career who hasn't yet developed a mid range or pull up shot that many college guards developed in Jr. High, can come up with a good one over a few weeks in the summer to use against high level D1 competition without a good amount of specific shooting instruction. There's a feel and awareness of where the D is that takes a lot of time to acquire. It's not just mechanics being repeated.