Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="willtalk, post: 2541373, member: 1220"] Let me begin by saying that I did not watch that many games last season, but the ones I did I would agree that Pivec was very effective. I have watched almost all the games this season. Than you Pac 12 Network/Comcast. and was also able to record for replay. Pivec was also very effective stat wise ( except for turnovers) in most of the earlier games despite playing the point. Because of the lesser opposition turnovers and poor situational circumstances choices did not have as many negative results or even impacted the outcome of the games that much. That began to manifest when they faced the superior athletes of UCLA, USC, and Arizona St. It was then that Rueck knew he needed to make a change. You can get away with a lot of things against inferior competition or a team that does not match up with your team at specific positions. Whether a team is better with any player on the floor is dependent of a lot of other variables. At any given time any team is better without even their best players on the floor. If that were not so than no player would ever be benched when they are not producing. Making a blanket statement like " In any case the Beavers are better with Pivec on the floor than with out her on the floor" does not take into consideration situational changes and circumstances. If that were so then Rueck would not have played Goodman 24 min. and Pivec 28. He played McWilliams 32, Tudor 39. Pivec was 1-7 shooting , with one assist and the team ran better with Goodwin on the floor that game. Who makes the team better is highly situational and can vary from game to game. They only played Tudor 14 min against Arizona st. That sort of situation can last for a game or sometimes even longer. My point is that the situation is different this year than last. The situation will change as the season goes on. Players roles will change as well. Who will be on the floor this year and next will depends what any player brings in respect to the teams needs. Last years stats mean very little this year because the teams dynamic and players are so different. Next year it will change again because of the addition of Slocum. Slocum will definitely replace someone in the starting lineup and the player she replaces will hinge on the skills she brings that would negate the least need the replaced player supplies. A lot will depend on which players compliment each other the most. As to Pivec being a solid defender- not really. Oregon state is not blessed with a lot of really quick players. Quickness and footwork are the core of playing defense. The over all standard for that at Oregon st. is low. Pivec is the weakest of the three starting Oregon parameter defenders by quite a bit. Her technique and focus is not good. This is why I pointed out Sabally's big game was partially because they switched Pivec over to her. As to your statement that Pivec needs to shoot more, from the parameter perhaps. But she needs to be much more selective to drives to the hoop. From what I have observed recently she ends up driving into double teams only to get her shot blocked. Those attempts only work against lesser talent. This is where a lot of those 1-7 results come from. If she does drive she needs to look for a kick out player to pass too instead of usually being locked into finishing in an impossible situation. She might have been more successful last season on those because Weisner usually drew a lot of defensive attention. I wouldn't get too locked into making an evaluation as to a players value based on a different past circumstance. With different players and circumstances, the team dynamics and chemistry changes resulting in different team needs and requiring a change in players roles. Slocum is only one aspect. I am sure the lack of points in the paint will also have a yet unforeseen effect as well. I have seen the 6'9" player and she is not close to being ready to replace Gulich offensively yet. Defensively she is relatively good, but where will that offense form Gulich come from? Perhaps that 6'7" forward is an offensive threat. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach