Number one reason for the 5 losses

[BBallF]

She has to get the ball more. Against SC, the #1 team, Shade took 19 shots...6 more than Edwards the Senior. That has to change.

Especially since Aaliyah was the best inside player in the game.

 

[hoophuskee]

Don't agree with the OP at all or any other reason other than "injuries." That's the reason why they have as many losses as they do. It isn't just one injury with UConn - it is five. Five. Fudd had outplayed or at least played even to Clark last year when she was healthy. Ducharme for a time took over the number 1 option even though UCONN had CWill, Evina, Aaliyah, and Liv.

The size issue would have been minimized a bit all year if Patterson and El Alfy were also on the team. I'll just speak for Patterson; she was not the freak athlete that we saw in her frosh year vs what I saw from those High School games in which she looked like a freakish gazelle.

The combination of offense and defense has been enormously compromised. This combination of losses because of injury is why there are 5 losses.

Good luck to our team tonight!

 

[hoophuskee]

And those championship teams always had that. 2015 Stewie, Tuck, Stokes, then Collier replaced Stokes as the 3rd interior defender.
It isn' a coincidence that since then Uconn hasn't had multiple great interior defenders, and hasn't won a championship.

You know when Stewie first came aboard, there were a lot of posters on here that didn't want Stewi playing inside in fear the opposing teams would bang her too much. The infatuation with size remains extremely over-exaggerated.

UCONN built it's team around two potential "generational guards", and their next highest recruits were Ducharme and Patterson. - Well they all have bene significantly hurt.

If size was the end-all-be-all then can anyone explain what happened South Carolina vs a not very athletic Iowa? And why the next team they played in the title game - their top inside player was 6'3? If height is some important why do these recent examples get dismissed?

Bottom-line is - that 0215 team - you forgot to mention -- Stokes was never replaced by Collier because they weren't in the same classes. If you really want to mention Stokes senior year, then you also have to look at other players on the team named Moriah Jefferson and Kaleena Mosqueda Lewis It appears you are glossing over them. That 2015 team had 4 first team all-American caliber players on it. That team's success was much more than just "size."

Instead, in UCONNs title years, many of those years they had multiple 1st team All-Americans. It didn't matter big or small. Other than DT's run, they had always lots of a/a's.


Got this just in time.

 

[Jim R]

You know when Stewie first came aboard, there were a lot of posters on here that didn't want Stewi playing inside in fear the opposing teams would bang her too much. The infatuation with size remains extremely over-exaggerated.

UCONN built it's team around two potential "generational guards", and their next highest recruits were Ducharme and Patterson. - Well they all have bene significantly hurt.

If size was the end-all-be-all then can anyone explain what happened South Carolina vs a not very athletic Iowa? And why the next team they played in the title game - their top inside player was 6'3? If height is some important why do these recent examples get dismissed?

Bottom-line is - that 0215 team - you forgot to mention -- Stokes was never replaced by Collier because they weren't in the same classes. If you really want to mention Stokes senior year, then you also have to look at other players on the team named Moriah Jefferson and Kaleena Mosqueda Lewis It appears you are glossing over them. That 2015 team had 4 first team all-American caliber players on it. That team's success was much more than just "size."

Instead, in UCONNs title years, many of those years they had multiple 1st team All-Americans. It didn't matter big or small. Other than DT's run, they had always lots of a/a's.


Got this just in time.

Did you watch the IOWA - SC game? If so, you may have noticed that IOWA employed a sagging match up zone most of the game...that greatly limited the effectiveness of the pass into the post. Simply put, and most knowledgeable basketball observers admitted, Staley was simply outcoached by Lisa Bluder. Carolina depended on their inside game and it wasn't there against IOWA. And, Staley didn't adjust her game plan. But, Staley learned from it, hence the addition of Pao Pao during the off season - a dependable shooter from the outside. As far as the next game, LSU simply had better athletes, and shot the lights out from long range - it happens.
No, am not sure anyone said that size was the end-all-be all...but, when you're playing a game where the goal is 10 feet high, and second chances depend, to a great extent, on getting rebounds from missed shots...it sure does help. And, simply, would you rather shoot over an opponent that is 6"2" or 6'5". It is really pretty simple. Again without it -size- it simply makes winning that much tougher. While I'm a big believer in Pete Carrill's maxim that "The strong take from the weak, but the smart take from the strong", and believe UCONN historically has been one of the smartest teams in WCBB, other coaches have raised their game, and having some of the strong or tall, can make a smart team hard to beat!