Player Evaluation

[meyers7]

It doesn't matter how many starting positions are open because a player is graduating. What matters is how well the players on the roster are practicing .

But what many people are confusing is starting and playing time. Geno has said, and he has practiced this over the years, playing time is based on practice. He has, to my knowledge, never said starting games is based on practice.

Many year ago, Geno started a senior guard (can't remember who - wasn't Amy Duran but somebody back around that time), and would sub her after about 3-4 minutes. And you would hardly even see her again the rest of the half. Only averaged about 10-12 minutes a game it seemed. But she started.

 

[doggydaddy]

This board has selective memories. Many posters said Lewis would start, based on the same logic they are using now.

Geno didn't start DT and didn't start Maya either until injury. He is loyal to his seniors and won't have them lose their starting positions to freshman.'

It's not that complicated.

 

[Aluminny69]

This board has selective memories. Many posters said Lewis would start, based on the same logic they are using now.

Geno didn't start DT and didn't start Maya either until injury. He is loyal to his seniors and won't have them lose their starting positions to freshman.'

It's not that complicated.

Doty's starting is related to her injury. I don't think posters could have anticipated that. I don't think Brittany Hunter started with a similar injury.

Both Ann Strother and Nicole Wolfe started as freshmen. I don't remember the roster back then, but I'm sure there were upperclassmen who could have started.

Just to complicate things a little.

 

[Icebear]

Geno has said players earn their starting positions by their play during Practice. Based on what I know about Breanna, her play during Team USA games and what her coaches have said, there's no way she's not in the starting rotation. She will outplay both Kelly and Caroline in practice and Geno will have her starting. I also believe that both Kelly and Caroline will see the team will benefit more by having Breanna in the starting lineup.

Yes, they do and to expect Caroline or Faris to stop doing that is just nonsense. Geno has said it is earned in practice by effort those two are all about 100% effort. Most freshmen need to learn the difference between high school level effort and college level effort.

 

[JoePgh]

More recently, Stef and Bria started as freshmen last year, from the very first game. But there were NOT upperclassmen who could do the job. Next year (barring injury) that will not be an issue.

Still, I can easily imagine one freshman (probably Breanna) cracking the starting lineup despite plausible upperclass talent ahead of her, just because of the size and skill she would bring to the 4 position. If she doesn't start, she will (like KML) get "starter's minutes".

 

[Wbbfan1]

I'm not saying that Caroline or Kelly will give less then 100% effort. I am saying that Breanna will give 100% effort and will win a starting position because of it and her talents. Her talent and abilities far exceed those of Caroline and Kelly and IMHO she will be one of the starters from day one. She also fills a need more scoring up front to take some pressure off Kiah or Stef which will open up the offense.

However, that's next year and I'm actually more concerned if this team will win Monday against ND and how will they fare in the Big East tournament. The last few games teams have been given a road map on how to beat this years team. To win out, the defense will have to be great and Bria and KML will need to have good shooting days.

Yes, they do and to expect Caroline or Faris to stop doing that is just nonsense. Geno has said it is earned in practice by effort those two are all about 100% effort. Most freshmen need to learn the difference between high school level effort and college level effort.

 

[Icebear]

I'm not saying that Caroline or Kelly will give less then 100% effort. I am saying that Breanna will give 100% effort and will win a starting position because of it and her talents. Her talent and abilities far exceed those of Caroline and Kelly and IMHO she will be one of the starters from day one. She also fills a need more scoring up front to take some pressure off Kiah or Stef which will open up the offense.

However, that's next year and I'm actually more concerned if this team will win Monday against ND and how will they fare in the Big East tournament. The last few games teams have been given a road map on how to beat this years team. To win out, the defense will have to be great and Bria and KML will need to have good shooting days.

And I believe you said the same about KML this year. Breanna will give 100% of high school and far better most anyone. It still will not be consistent college effort from the start. Every kid runs into the change of expectations just like Kaleena.

 

[Tonyc]

I see alot of different combinations for Geno this year and next. Kiah has come on and adds a different dimension to the team. Kiah down low and Stef up top with her great outside shot. On defense Stef in the middle and Kiah on the wing with the ability to move around and block shots. KML and Bria on the wings withTiff at the point giving Bria and KML shots from the corner and wing and Tiff the ability to drive the middle. Alot of combos and IMO it really doesnt matter who starts. What matters is the match ups.

Againest ND the taking charges and calling lean in fouls on the offense is imperative. I think we see that. When Kiah and Stef are on the floor together Diggins and Novesel will have probelms driving the lane.

Next season the height and athleticism will be ridiculous. We should lead the nation in blocked shots. Next year will be unbeleivable.

 

[doggydaddy]

Doty's starting is related to her injury. I don't think posters could have anticipated that. I don't think Brittany Hunter started with a similar injury.

Both Ann Strother and Nicole Wolfe started as freshmen. I don't remember the roster back then, but I'm sure there were upperclassmen who could have started.

Just to complicate things a little.

Injury was just one reason Caroline is starting. She started the entire season she was healthy. And that won't change next year.

Strother and Wolfe's freshman year, there were 3 upperclassmen. Juniors DT and Conlon started and Junior Morgan Valley started 18 games.

But they didn't come in and start over any returning starters. That would have been the comparison.

 

[Bestiarius]

Thanks to Scotter and huskybill for providing some interesting info in the spirit of my original question. Regarding phil s' comment "paralysis by analysis ?" I look at it as "different strokes". There are a lot of ways people enjoy the sport. Some just want to know who won. Others only care about the point spread. Some are stat junkies. All valid. My goal in starting this thread was to see if a method existed that would compare the relative value of each player in a given game or season. Granted, this is impossible to do with total accuracy, but I think there has to be a more accurate way than what we look at today.

I think someone could come up with a numerical value say, for a steal. The derived number might be complex to compute, but once determined, could be easily applied to a box score. For example, taking a shot for a 50% shooter is worth 1 point on average. A steal is worth about 1 point for the shot the opponent didn't have the opportunity to take plus a point for the shot the stealing team will take. The person who caused the ball to be stolen should also lose a point. Each statistical category could be converted to points.

Some shooters score a lot of points because they take lots of shots, yet we don't penalize them for the misses. A person that doesn't shoot often gets the reputation of not being able to score even though their shooting %age is not that much worse than the prolific launcher. I'd like to see what would happen if Kelly took 25 shots in a game. Should be easy to do since she's not guarded. , where she comes away holding the ball or tips it in bounds where it is recoverd by the Huskys.

A block has different values. A player that blocks the ball into the upper deck, while fun to watch, has limited value to the team. A block that is tipped to a team mate is worth much more. I notice that Stef's blocks are often of the latter type.

Anyhow, I beg the indulgence of those who just like to sit back and enjoy the game without thinking about these mental gymnastics.

 

[doggydaddy]

Thanks to Scotter and huskybill for providing some interesting info in the spirit of my original question. Regarding phil s' comment "paralysis by analysis ?" I look at it as "different strokes". There are a lot of ways people enjoy the sport. Some just want to know who won. Others only care about the point spread. Some are stat junkies. All valid. My goal in starting this thread was to see if a method existed that would compare the relative value of each player in a given game or season. Granted, this is impossible to do with total accuracy, but I think there has to be a more accurate way than what we look at today.

I think someone could come up with a numerical value say, for a steal. The derived number might be complex to compute, but once determined, could be easily applied to a box score. For example, taking a shot for a 50% shooter is worth 1 point on average. A steal is worth about 1 point for the shot the opponent didn't have the opportunity to take plus a point for the shot the stealing team will take. The person who caused the ball to be stolen should also lose a point. Each statistical category could be converted to points.

Some shooters score a lot of points because they take lots of shots, yet we don't penalize them for the misses. A person that doesn't shoot often gets the reputation of not being able to score even though their shooting %age is not that much worse than the prolific launcher. I'd like to see what would happen if Kelly took 25 shots in a game. Should be easy to do since she's not guarded. , where she comes away holding the ball or tips it in bounds where it is recoverd by the Huskys.

A block has different values. A player that blocks the ball into the upper deck, while fun to watch, has limited value to the team. A block that is tipped to a team mate is worth much more. I notice that Stef's blocks are often of the latter type.

Anyhow, I beg the indulgence of those who just like to sit back and enjoy the game without thinking about these mental gymnastics.

I love this stuff and you posed a great question.

I'm sure the coaching staff has a formula that they use on their team and when analyzing recruits.

 

[bruinbball]

I remember coming up with the F4 - "Freshman Fenom Faris Factor" Kelly's Freshman year using a system like you are suggesting. However, others - namely Phil, had other systems far superior.

 

[meyers7]

Both Ann Strother and Nicole Wolfe started as freshmen. I don't remember the roster back then, but I'm sure there were upperclassmen who could have started.

Taurasi, Conlon, M Valley, Battle, Moore, A Valley, Marron were the upper classmen. Strother, Wolfe, Turner and Crockett were the Frosh.

 

[tomcat]

Just something I noticed in the last game. Maybe it's been happening all the time, I don't know, but it seemed so obvious against Pitt. Twice in the first half, Kelly snagged an offensive rebound on the right side of the basket, maybe 6-8 feet away, and was in what I thought was a great position to just push the ball up there again. Both times, she turned and moved the ball back outside. Now, it's a good thing that the team got another shot at a basket because of her efforts, but I just wish that one at least one of those shots she popped up and shot the ball. Neither was quite a gimme, but both could be made.

 

[doggydaddy]

Taurasi, Conlon, M Valley, Battle, Moore, A Valley, Marron were the upper classmen. Strother, Wolfe, Turner and Crockett were the Frosh.

Battle, Moore, Valley and Marron were sophomores.

Not upper classmen.

 

[doggydaddy]

Just something I noticed in the last game. Maybe it's been happening all the time, I don't know, but it seemed so obvious against Pitt. Twice in the first half, Kelly snagged an offensive rebound on the right side of the basket, maybe 6-8 feet away, and was in what I thought was a great position to just push the ball up there again. Both times, she turned and moved the ball back outside. Now, it's a good thing that the team got another shot at a basket because of her efforts, but I just wish that one at least one of those shots she popped up and shot the ball. Neither was quite a gimme, but both could be made.

She did just that off a Dolson miss.

 

[JRRRJ]

Anyhow, ... thinking about these mental gymnastics.

You said the magic words! Here's the link to the latest per-40-minutes stats spreadsheet.

 

[meyers7]

Battle, Moore, Valley and Marron were sophomores.

Not upper classmen.

I know, but that makes it even more likely to start Freshmen.

 

[Sonny44]

paralysis by analysis ?

Reducing everything to simple math.

Good things: points, steals, rebounds, assists . Put these in the numerator.
Bad things: turnovers, misses, fouls. Put these in the denominator.

Did I miss any good or bad thing that can be counted?

Rating = (pts x steals x rebounds x assists) / (tos x misses x fouls)
or
Rating = (pts + steals + rebounds+ assists) / (tos + misses + fouls)

Crazy, huh?

But for you guys who seem to have access to every number in UCONN WBB history it might be interesting to calculate for a couple of our greatest stars, a couple of our good players and a couple of our poorer (did we have any) players. May have to correlate within position though; i.e. not compare a center to a guard, etc.

If nothing else we might finally prove that players can't be compared using statistics (something we already know).
Please don't write me back saying this is nonsense I already know that.

 

[doggydaddy]

I know, but that makes it even more likely to start Freshmen.

Just confused why you called them upperclassmen?

 

[meyers7]

Just confused why you called them upperclassmen?

Just listing the roster for Alumni69. They were "upper" to the freshmen I guess.

 

[phil sampieri]

Reducing everything to simple math.

Good things: points, steals, rebounds, assists . Put these in the numerator.
Bad things: turnovers, misses, fouls. Put these in the denominator.

Did I miss any good or bad thing that can be counted?

Rating = (pts x steals x rebounds x assists) / (tos x misses x fouls)
or
Rating = (pts + steals + rebounds+ assists) / (tos + misses + fouls)

Crazy, huh?

But for you guys who seem to have access to every number in UCONN WBB history it might be interesting to calculate for a couple of our greatest stars, a couple of our good players and a couple of our poorer (did we have any) players. May have to correlate within position though; i.e. not compare a center to a guard, etc.

If nothing else we might finally prove that players can't be compared using statistics (something we already know).
Please don't write me back saying this is nonsense I already know that.

Hate to be a stick in the mud but statistics such as yours really don't measure one player from another necessarily.Making a three
after the opposing team just made a run, quiting the home crowd deserves as much as credit as 4 or 6 points in certain instances.
Diana could have averaged 10 more points a game had she hoisted more shots per game. She had the ability above any player I
ever saw in making that game momentum shifting shot too many times to count.

 

[CCinCT]

Hate to be a stick in the mud but statistics such as yours really don't measure one player from another necessarily.Making a three
after the opposing team just made a run, quiting the home crowd deserves as much as credit as 4 or 6 points in certain instances.
Diana could have averaged 10 more points a game had she hoisted more shots per game. She had the ability above any player I
ever saw in making that game momentum shifting shot too many times to count.

Exactly, and if I had to pick one player to make that game ending shot I would pick Diana over any UCONN player before or after. If we could pin Geno down and make him give us the answer to who he would have taking the shot with the game on the line, who would he pick ?

If I had to pick a player to build a team around, it would be Diana and I think she pretty much proved why 2002 -2004.

Stats are fun, but they don't come anywhere close to telling the whole story. Why was Shenika? Smith picked to take the last shot for SJU ? I don't think it was her 3 point shooting stats.

 

[Sonny44]

Yea, I agree.

 

[Bestiarius]

Thanks JRRRJ, love the per 40 minutes stats. So much more meaningful than the more commonly available numbers. Tiffany really shines. Although she doesn't start, KML averages more minutes than 2 starters and almost as many minutes as Kelly. Heather is the leading rebounder, but she is usually in when the opponents subs are in. Kelly is the team leader in assists & steals. Lots of other interesting facts too.

 

[Bestiarius]

Exactly, and if I had to pick one player to make that game ending shot I would pick Diana over any UCONN player before or after. If we could pin Geno down and make him give us the answer to who he would have taking the shot with the game on the line, who would he pick ?

If I had to pick a player to build a team around, it would be Diana and I think she pretty much proved why 2002 -2004.

Stats are fun, but they don't come anywhere close to telling the whole story. Why was Shenika? Smith picked to take the last shot for SJU ? I don't think it was her 3 point shooting stats.

I could never understand the concept of the "clutch" player. Usually, it's the best player that is expected to take the shot, except when it's expected that the best player will be heavily covered, then some unsuspected player would get the job with a specially designed play.

Regarding Diana, I think I'd like to see her take shots at any point during the game, not just the last shot. Besides, how many games did Diana play where a buzzer beater was necessary? It only takes a couple or three made shots at the right time to give that player a nerves-of-steel rep for the rest of their career. Bria has been that person lately after her critical makes last year, but we'll see how the SJU last-second miss affects her savior role in the future.

I agree stats don't tell the whole story. There are so many factors other than the numbers that influence the outcome of games. Plus, our perception of what is going on in a game - what we are seeing is flawed and skewed by our perceptions and personal prejudices. If it wasn't, we'd all agree on who the best players were. Even the Tennessee fans would agree that Uconn had the better players

My interest in stats is to provide an additional dimension when watching the games. That's why I'm asking if anyone has come up with a method of assigning points to the various stat categories in hopes that when the numbers were calculated, the result would closely parallel what happened in the game. If that could be achieved, the numbers would truly be a good indication of which players were the most valuable. Of course, we may not want this, because we'd have little to talk about.

 

[Icebear]

I would put Sue right there with Diana when it comes to the end of game situation.

 

[JonB]

My interest in stats is to provide an additional dimension when watching the games. That's why I'm asking if anyone has come up with a method of assigning points to the various stat categories in hopes that when the numbers were calculated, the result would closely parallel what happened in the game. If that could be achieved, the numbers would truly be a good indication of which players were the most valuable. Of course, we may not want this, because we'd have little to talk about.

Agreed, but it's also the case that a number of measurables simply aren't readily available. For example, with what speed does each guard catch and throw the ball around the perimeter, such as when trying to get a zone defense moving to open up a driving or passing lane? The speed of the ball movement is critical in getting the defense out of position, but have you ever seen a published statistic on how fast a player catches and passes (like the measures of a pitcher's time to the plate)? I sure haven't -- which is not to say the coaching staff isn't measuring that sort of thing.

Another example: box-outs. How many times in a game does a UConn player get a rebound in part because other players have found and boxed out an opposing player? (I'm picturing Kelly doing that as I write this.) Is there a stat that shows how many box-outs each player made as a percentage of the number of rebound opportunities? That would be interesting, wouldn't it?

So, one reason stats tell only part of the story is that we just don't have the stats for a lot of things. I'm not talking about intangibles like leadership; I'm talking about physical measures of performance that we simply don't have available. Of course, if we did have them it would only lead to more arguments discussion about what those numbers mean!