Poll - Will the talented bench force Geno to give them more PT?

[Alydar]

With so much talent on the bench, how will Geno be able to ignore them?
There will need to be a much more equal distribution of PT then in the past.
LSU was able to win a NC in part by allowing a phenomenal freshmen to start every game, & LSU has another phenom coming in.
Will Geno be able to break his own mold & reward his most talented freshmen & underclassmen with adequate PT?
Or will we see the same old pattern of Geno playing his favorite core players?
Will Geno focus more on developing his bench players & less on winning by blow outs?

If there is one thing Geno and the entire coaching staff has been clear about it's that game minutes are earned in practice. Games are for performance, practice is for development.
I want to see skilled and entertaining games. How many people go to a play and after 2 wonderful acts say: "I hope the understudies do the 3rd act so they can develop"?

 

[sun]

If there is one thing Geno and the entire coaching staff has been clear about it's that game minutes are earned in practice. Games are for performance, practice is for development.
I want to see skilled and entertaining games. How many people go to a play and after 2 wonderful acts say: "I hope the understudies do the 3rd act so they can develop"?

Some of last year's starters showed that they weren't elite players in at least one aspect of the game or other.
Yet fans are still listing them as potential starters this year.
That's somewhat understandable because we haven't seen new & the improved returning players yet.
But it's entirely possible that some of the 2nd string players are more talented than the 1st string which we don't even know who either the 1st or 2nd string players will be yet either.
But the point is that in many cases there can be multiple players who are relatively equally talented.
There's a lot of excuses made, about criteria & evaluations postulated about how starters are selected.
I can't say with any certainty that the selection methods always correlate to actual game performance.
Sometimes yes, other times no.
The problem is consistency, or inconsistency of young college players.
And that's what it will often boil down to in the end is consistency.
I just don't always buy the argument that one player will always play better than another.
In every sport even among professionals they have many different ways to track & measure performance.
But they use past performance to predict future performance which is still like gazing into a crystal ball.
But consistency cannot always be predicted especially when it involves different match ups, different combinations of players, and so many other variables.

To say that PT is earned in practice is not always true & accurate.
Practice is not the same as a game, it's a regular routine among the same players all of the time.
A player can have the best practice and not play as well in the game, & vice versa.

I think it boils down to which players that Geno trusts.
But no one really wants to admit that Geno doesn't trust some players.
They would rather say that it's because of practice.
But if some players have more equal ability then Geno would be more likely to substitute more players.
It depends whether they can display enough consistency to earn trust.

If UConn loses a game unexpectedly then perhaps the inconsistent players would be more noticeable.
For some set plays experience counts, but then in other instances being able to play 1 on 1 counts can count more than a set play & experience.
Or being able to perform another function on the court counts too.
Every player will have some advantages & disadvantages if & when they're played.
Then there's how much MOV does Geno think that he needs in order to win a games instead of using more subs.
What does Geno's expected MOV have to with how well a 2nd or 3rd string player does in practice?

 

[Skeets]

Will it's been awhile, but back around the turn of the century some of the UCONN teams had 9-11 players with > 10 mpg.

So not "never", but not in awhile.

I agree. There was a time when almost nobody played more than 25 minutes. However, for the better part of the last 2 decades it's been primarily a core group of players.

Maybe with 14 healthy, talented players UConn can go back to the way it used to be. But, I wouldn't wager the mortgage money on it...

 

[Skeets]

Geno will play as many players as he trusts to be on the court during “prime time.” That certainly includes: Paige, Azzi, Aaliyah, Nika, Aubrey, Caroline and likely Ayanna. Beyond that, Ice, Jana, KK, Ashlynn & Quadence have yet to play a minute of college basketball and Amari and Ines are both a work in progress.

While we would all like to see Geno employ a deep bench, that plays agressive full court defense and up tempo transition offense, much depends on the individual players ability to step up and assume the responsibility to make it happen.

We’ve heard some very good things about a number of the youngsters. Ice, Jana & KK in particular stand out with their “potential” impact this coming season. In about 5-6 months we should have a pretty good idea of just how many players on UConn’s roster are, in fact, ready for prime time.

Oldude, I wouldn't describe Inês (got to have that funny little hat over the "e") as being a work in progress. She's just in the tough position of having a lot of talent in front of her. In different circumstances, let's say some obscure community college in Florida, she would be a superstar. She did give UConn some decent minutes last year. Interestingly, there were a few minutes when both Nika and Inês were on the court together. I'd like to see a little more of that for the entertainment value...

 

[Gordo]

To say that PT is earned in practice is not always true & accurate.
Practice is not the same as a game, it's a regular routine among the same players all of the time.
A player can have the best practice and not play as well in the game, & vice versa.

I think it boils down to which players that Geno trusts.
But no one really wants to admit that Geno doesn't trust some players.
They would rather say that it's because of practice.
But if some players have more equal ability then Geno would be more likely to substitute more players.
It depends whether they can display enough consistency to earn trust.

PT means "Prime Time" and is earned by players who have proven they can play this game at this level and under all circumstances better than those players left sitting on the bench. Playing time is just "playing time", and for the most part means the player gets in the game when the outcome has already been decided. There is a very big difference between the two.

Just how do you think Geno earns trust in a player? First it comes from what he sees in PRACTICE. That's why the majority of people on this site (or any site) understand that game minutes are earned in PRACTICE. Yes, there can be that special player who for one reason or another just isn't impressive in practice. Yet given the opportunity can simply take over a game. Caroline Ducharme, when healthy comes to mind.

 

[visitingcock]

"Force Geno."

I giggle a little each time I see this thread title.

 

[sun]

With more parity in the game & the transfer portal, now more than ever Geno is in the business of developing outstanding players into elite players.
But short of being able to only play his "best" players, now more than ever he needs to make the entire UConn team play together as an elite team overall & not only rely on superstars.
UConn has some even more talented players coming next year with Cheli & Ziebell, but for this year Geno needs to see if enough players can step it up a notch, even if only for short stretches.
There are combinations of players that can play great together, but there's bound to be more subs needed too.

 

[Steelerone]

Here is one of the problems with Div. 1 athletics, man or woman. Supposedly a player is recruited and told they will have to earn their playing time. Really? Do you think a recruiter is going to tell a four or five star player that if they make the decision to come their school they won't start? So the player comes. This is the coach's dilemma. If another player is equal or a little better does he set the five star player and lose the next recruit or does he keep them in the starting lineup. And don't kid yourself, Geno has had this problem for the last twenty five years.

 

[hoophuskee]

With more parity in the game & the transfer portal, now more than ever Geno is in the business of developing outstanding players into elite players.
But short of being able to only play his "best" players, now more than ever he needs to make the entire UConn team play together as an elite team overall & not only rely on superstars.
UConn has some even more talented players coming next year with Cheli & Ziebell, but for this year Geno needs to see if enough players can step it up a notch, even if only for short stretches.
There are combinations of players that can play great together, but there's bound to be more subs needed too.

The enitre team plays better when his best players play. That's the entire reason you have starters and a bench. The starters and usually 1 to 3 others off the bench are among his core best 7-8 players. You play them. Geno is in the busniess of winning (not making everyone happy) and he has won more than anyone else other than Tara. His philsophy speaks for itself.

In big games Paige and Azzi if heallthy are better for the team palying 37-40 minutes than sitting them 10-15 for a bench player.

 

[LwrcasefaN]

KK will play early and often.

I think the early part is more probable than often. But often won't be too far behind. She has the combination of fast (understatement) and finishing at the rim through contact that I haven't seen since MoJeff.

 

[sun]

The enitre team plays better when his best players play. That's the entire reason you have starters and a bench. The starters and usually 1 to 3 others off the bench are among his core best 7-8 players. You play them. Geno is in the busniess of winning (not making everyone happy) and he has won more than anyone else other than Tara. His philsophy speaks for itself.

In big games Paige and Azzi if heallthy are better for the team palying 37-40 minutes than sitting them 10-15 for a bench player.

I think the question is how can it be determined which players are the best when so many have been shown to be up & down in consistency.
It's not noticed as much unless the game is close or results in a loss, particularly in March Madness.
i.e. - everyone including Geno recognizes when there's a high number of turnovers.
Who the core players are on any given night is an enigma.

Enigma - a person or thing that is mysterious, puzzling, or difficult to understand.

It's easy to say "best" but not as easy to explain who they are or why.
Experience doesn't always supersede talent.

 

[hoophuskee]

I think the question is how can it be determined which players are the best when so many have been shown to be up & down in consistency.
It's not noticed as much unless the game is close or results in a loss, particularly in March Madness.
i.e. - everyone including Geno recognizes when there's a high number of turnovers.
Who the core players are on any given night is an enigma.

Enigma - a person or thing that is mysterious, puzzling, or difficult to understand.

It's easy to say "best" but not as easy to explain who they are or why.
Experience doesn't always supersede talent.

Inconsistency? UCONN was top 5 in the country. If they were so inconsistent then what about 99% of the other teams?

And, you have to realize that these are college kids, not pros. If Geno isn’t mentioning turnovers he is mentioning outside shooting, or rebounding, or BODY LANGUAGE (he does complain about that from time-to-time) etc. Because they aren't pros they will be inconsistent at some things. That's what "College is." And if you think the bench will be less inconsistent, then I don’t know what to say?. There has to be an understanding why "starters start." They are "better." Adn when you play your better players, your chances of winning increase.

As far as the core being an enigma? Huh? UCONN had injuries to Paige, Azzi, ice, Dorka missed 8 (plus whenever she returned may have taken a game here or there. It wasn't 8 consecutive.), Caroline, and we now know Lou, Patterson, and Amari were banged up much more than we thought yet UCONN was top 5. Adn yet your calling the players that played a lot and won so much that are returning plus the potential additions of Paige, and a healthy Azzi and Caroline among others as an "enigma?"

IMO you treat the bottom of the bench as if they are the starters assuming just because you give them minutes they "will be ready" with little regard that they can blow a game. Vs the starters and 1st/2nd off the bench you treat them as the enigma just because they aren't perfect with little regard to if you play the bottom tier bench that despite the minutes you give them, they will more likely be less consistent than the core. Bottomline is that the bench is the enigma not the starters.

IN addition, if you don’t give the starters and the core enough minutes together, then the chances increase that they will become more of an enigma. They are college kids. Not pros. Each game in-of-itself is an enigma to a degree for college players. They need to lrearn by playing - palying with people they are accustomed to. And Geno's job is to look for perfection, even body language. It's not mine as a fan. And if anyone thinks if Paige and Azzi are healthy that turnovers will be a problem next year, then again I don’t what to say other than—“wow.” OFc a random game with college kids anything is possible.

 

[hoophuskee]

Here is one of the problems with Div. 1 athletics, man or woman. Supposedly a player is recruited and told they will have to earn their playing time. Really? Do you think a recruiter is going to tell a four or five star player that if they make the decision to come their school they won't start? So the player comes. This is the coach's dilemma. If another player is equal or a little better does he set the five star player and lose the next recruit or does he keep them in the starting lineup. And don't kid yourself, Geno has had this problem for the last twenty five years.

Ther;e is a lot to this how you describe it. Geno started Doty her senrior year but she played less than soem of the bench player's I believe. So, in the last 4 games of NCAA's in her sr year she palyed between 3 and 13 minutes despite starting. SO how improitant is "starting?"

The above is a also a case which can be said is that geno may have wanted firepower off the bench. So by not starting the player but that player gets more minutes, how big of an issue is it?

Geno also started Nika over AUbrey 2nd half of Nika's frosh year. In this case, the better palyer was Aubrey but for the team need the better fit was Nika. And yet how many predicted Nika would start? So, yet in this case it certainly does show that earning playing time was a fact and that starting Nika vs the A/A (I realize Nika could not be an A/A but it's clear she hasn't the "talent" vs Aubrey) is what you say above. in descrbign the pitch a coach can make

 

[CONN78SEJ]

I think the question is how can it be determined which players are the best when so many have been shown to be up & down in consistency.
It's not noticed as much unless the game is close or results in a loss, particularly in March Madness.
i.e. - everyone including Geno recognizes when there's a high number of turnovers.
Who the core players are on any given night is an enigma.

Enigma - a person or thing that is mysterious, puzzling, or difficult to understand.

It's easy to say "best" but not as easy to explain who they are or why.
Experience doesn't always supersede talent.

UConn history has shown that highly recruited and ranked kids don’t always work out at UConn like people thought they would. Charde Houston, Nicole Wolff and Amari, to name a few.

 

[sun]

Inconsistency? UCONN was top 5 in the country. If they were so inconsistent then what about 99% of the other teams?

And, you have to realize that these are college kids, not pros. If Geno isn’t mentioning turnovers he is mentioning outside shooting, or rebounding, or BODY LANGUAGE (he does complain about that from time-to-time) etc. Because they aren't pros they will be inconsistent at some things. That's what "College is." And if you think the bench will be less inconsistent, then I don’t know what to say?. There has to be an understanding why "starters start." They are "better." Adn when you play your better players, your chances of winning increase.

As far as the core being an enigma? Huh? UCONN had injuries to Paige, Azzi, ice, Dorka missed 8 (plus whenever she returned may have taken a game here or there. It wasn't 8 consecutive.), Caroline, and we now know Lou, Patterson, and Amari were banged up much more than we thought yet UCONN was top 5. Adn yet your calling the players that played a lot and won so much that are returning plus the potential additions of Paige, and a healthy Azzi and Caroline among others as an "enigma?"

IMO you treat the bottom of the bench as if they are the starters assuming just because you give them minutes they "will be ready" with little regard that they can blow a game. Vs the starters and 1st/2nd off the bench you treat them as the enigma just because they aren't perfect with little regard to if you play the bottom tier bench that despite the minutes you give them, they will more likely be less consistent than the core. Bottomline is that the bench is the enigma not the starters.

IN addition, if you don’t give the starters and the core enough minutes together, then the chances increase that they will become more of an enigma. They are college kids. Not pros. Each game in-of-itself is an enigma to a degree for college players. They need to lrearn by playing - palying with people they are accustomed to. And Geno's job is to look for perfection, even body language. It's not mine as a fan. And if anyone thinks if Paige and Azzi are healthy that turnovers will be a problem next year, then again I don’t what to say other than—“wow.” OFc a random game with college kids anything is possible.

I post things that come to mind to keep the discussion objective & lively, not only because I think it was true but also because it could continue to be true.
Let's look at some of the nitty gritty of individual player performances at various times:

Azzi has sometimes needed a 1/2 game to start warming up enough to begin making shots.
Nika has shown some inconsistency with TO's & scoring points that offset setting an assist record.
Carol has also sometimes caused turnovers due to bad bal handling & also rims out a lot of shots. Her shots are often "close but no cigar."
Aubrey is inconsistent enough to sometimes miss bunnies & shots, fails to take shots & makes questionable rebound attempts.
Edwards is capable of getting into foul trouble, tussling with opposing players & needing to sit on the bench.

These are some of our supposedly key core players that will need to step it up or possibly lose games or lose some PT to freshman who may be able to play with more consistency.
It's one thing to rack up points against lower rated teams, but against the best opponents there's not a lot time to waste on missing 3 point attempts when there are new players who have a mid range game or better 3 point efficiency
Making good decisions means less missed shots, less turnovers, better ball handling, less mistakes.

Before I posted that if the starters & the core can't establish enough of a lead to allow new players to get PT, then that could mean that some aren't playing as efficiently or well enough together as they need to in order to win a NC.
Substitutions will be made on the fly as they play the games.
I expect Ice to have an outstanding mid range game, Edwards to have an outstanding inside game, the others are going to need to execute more than just a 3 point game.
And there needs to be effective subs for everyone.
That's why I think that Geno will expand the core to 9, 10, 11 depending on the opponent, circumstances & strategy.
I like to think outside the box because inconsistency among college players can affect the results, especially during March.
The whole season leads up to March & Paige's window to win a NC isn't going to last forever.
Paige is an equal opportunity ball distributor & will be the glue that will help everyone around her to play their best no matter which players are on the court.
Her superstardom performances & leadership can help other players to get more PT on the court.
She can make up for the reasonable mistakes of others but will still need to be surrounded by the most competent players & not necessarily the most senior players unless they can actually perform the best.
IMO those suspected of being "the bench" can make enough of a difference to help win big games, especially with Paige's assistance.

 

[hoophuskee]

I post things that come to mind to keep the discussion objective & lively, not only because I think it was true but also because it could continue to be true.
Let's look at some of the nitty gritty of individual player performances at various times:

1—Sometimes any player needs time. Again, UCONN is not pros.

2—Why would you think with Paige and Azzi being healthy that Nika’s turnovers wouldn’t reduce a lot? So again I’ll mention that the core players are not the enigma. The bench is.

3--- Caroline is not a pro. Neither is the bench you want to see play. But Caroline has showed she can be the #1 option over CWill, Evina, and Edwards. This is not an enigma. It’s a fact. And yet again you are pushing the enigma. None of the enigma players have shown a #1 option capability in college for a top tier team yet. So why assume it? None of them coming out had Paige?Azzi buzz.

4—Again UCONN is not a pro team. College kids for all teams do miss bunnies. Even the UCONN freshmen will.

5—In re to foul trouble even pros get into foul trouble.

6—When n you say “supposedly our core” – no that’s wrong; that IS our core. Could be more but it IS.

7- What you need to understand about the3pt shot is that you get an extra point. Extra points are more valuable than taking more shots unless you make a lot. Yet you want to assume that the bench enigma's will make a lot. However, it really is simple math. You can’t ignore math. When a player shoots 40% from 3 -- that scores 12 points. A player from 2 needs to shoot 6 for 10 from 2 to get the same 12 points. So to say 3’s are a waste is like saying math doesn’t count because you say so. But math does count. In this case you still get the same 12 points.

8—I sometimes have to remind posters, usually the ones in love with rebounding, that the object of the game is to score more points. Not get more rebounds. With you I’d like to remind you is that the object of the game is to score more points not miss less shots. If you make more 3’s – even though you miss more you can still win. It’s about math and object of the game.

9--- You’re right if starters aren’t playing well it could mean that. It could also mean that the team needs to keep sticking with what they’ve done all year. For example, I wonder how bad Azzi was getting crucified during the Iowa game early? The moronic thing Geno would have done was to pull her instead of having her learn to work her way out of it. Which she did in amazing fashion. That's why super players come to a school like UCONN. The super palers come because they know they are good and they know they are going to learn and play a lot.

10—There doesn’t need to be an effective sub 1-for-1 for everyone (history has shown you can have a core 7/8 player rotation.). That is a made-up myth without any substance other than someone’s personal preference. It’s not bound in any fact. It’s just made up.

11—I like to think in reality that the bottom of the bench players are there for a reason. And to sub in them and take out your super players for example is a guaranteed failure. Outside the box thinking can be disastrous.

12—In regards to Paige we have to remember that UCONN is not a 1-player team. Other player’s make Paige better too. Paige getting open for 3’s at 46.4% is much better than any of the young freshman will do from 2 if they take enough shots.

13—Suppose Paige is having a bad day. Then wouldn’t it stand to reason that Azzi would have needed more time while Paige is in? Suppose Paige and Azzi are struggling. Then wouldn’t it stand to reason Edwards needs more time while Paige and Azzi are in? These are your best players. Sitting your potential A/a’s on the bench in tight games is about as backwards-thinking as one can get if that is their thought process.

Part of the success of the team will be Paige and Azzi and others hitting 3’s so the lane will be open for inside shots and/or drives and/or passes toward the basket. And defenses won't be able to key as much on her becuase Azzi is there etc.