Post? 4? 5?

[islandgurl]

(hoophuskee....I owe you a reply from a previous post and your most recent one....I'll catch up)

Interesting replies to my criticism of Geno in mishandling NB and adversely impacting the team's 2016 prospects. I have to stand by my contentions....explanations, justifications and rationalizations notwithstanding .

I was expecting a spirited defense of Geno, but am quite surprised at his wholesale acquittal. Plausible deniability would have been a nebulous but more acceptable cover, but I sensed instead a unified front exempting Geno from answerability, thus culpability. UConn in November will not be what it should be, and it's not "not anyone's fault"....providence isn't at play here . In all, it leaves an impression that is too cavalierly exculpatory. Sorry, guys .

Briefly, I'm sure Geno has a playbook with more dynamic play sets than an exclusionary all-must--fit-or-sit allusion. I'm also certain that the Stewie/Mo/Tuck legacy would not have been "jeopardized" had Geno settled for 20-pt wins instead of 40, wasting so many golden opportunities to produce greater team equilibrium, with a better prepared big in particular, ahead of the "rude awakening" scenario Geno himself created, then accurately prophesied. An 8-man rotation was the most effective for Geno to deliver on a better prepared and sufficiently ready starting 5, post Trinity Ascension and Geno Coronation....it didn't happen. I'm confident that Geno and staff can walk and chew gum at the same time,...they just got caught up with the transcendence of the season, and laid an egg for tomorrow .

 

[Kibitzer]

@islandgurl:

Ahem. You are a darn good writer.

 

[JRRRJ]

(hoophuskee....I owe you a reply from a previous post and your most recent one....I'll catch up)

Interesting replies to my criticism of Geno in mishandling NB and adversely impacting the team's 2016 prospects. I have to stand by my contentions....explanations, justifications and rationalizations notwithstanding .

I was expecting a spirited defense of Geno, but am quite surprised at his wholesale acquittal. Plausible deniability would have been a nebulous but more acceptable cover, but I sensed instead a unified front exempting Geno from answerability, thus culpability. UConn in November will not be what it should be, and it's not "not anyone's fault"....providence isn't at play here . In all, it leaves an impression that is too cavalierly exculpatory. Sorry, guys .

Briefly, I'm sure Geno has a playbook with more dynamic play sets than an exclusionary all-must--fit-or-sit allusion. I'm also certain that the Stewie/Mo/Tuck legacy would not have been "jeopardized" had Geno settled for 20-pt wins instead of 40, wasting so many golden opportunities to produce greater team equilibrium, with a better prepared big in particular, ahead of the "rude awakening" scenario Geno himself created, then accurately prophesied. An 8-man rotation was the most effective for Geno to deliver on a better prepared and sufficiently ready starting 5, post Trinity Ascension and Geno Coronation....it didn't happen. I'm confident that Geno and staff can walk and chew gum at the same time,...they just got caught up with the transcendence of the season, and laid an egg for tomorrow .

Are we to assume then you contend the transfer of Ms. Boykin and the injury to Ms. Butler were Geno's fault rather than "providence" (assuming that's an alias for "chance" rather than divine intervention)? Or that the decisions in the last 2 years of desired post players to attend other institutions are uniformly Geno's fault? I would demur.

The entire team knows the goal of the program is to win the conference title and the national championship -- every year. I believe UCMiami has accurately pointed out why it would have been inadvisable to the acquisition of this years goals to spend significant time re-training the team to adjust to playing a different style. An assumption that the players would have been able to perform in 2 very different styles (in all the substitution permutations) on both offense and defense is not obviously true. The acquisition of next year's goals is still well within the sphere of possibility.

Regarding the "rude awakening" as a result of an "unprepared" Natalie: since all observers and participants aver team practices are harder than games, low minutes played in games should have no impact on learning of the system or physical training. She should not have needed additional playing time to gain "college game toughness", as she had--as you pointed out--already demonstrated it during her freshman year. I expect her to be a significant contributor.

Love your writing style--reminds me of someone who my fallible memory refuses to identify.

 

[hoophuskee]

(hoophuskee....I owe you a reply from a previous post and your most recent one....I'll catch up)

Interesting replies to my criticism of Geno in mishandling NB and adversely impacting the team's 2016 prospects. I have to stand by my contentions....explanations, justifications and rationalizations notwithstanding .

I was expecting a spirited defense of Geno, but am quite surprised at his wholesale acquittal. Plausible deniability would have been a nebulous but more acceptable cover, but I sensed instead a unified front exempting Geno from answerability, thus culpability. UConn in November will not be what it should be, and it's not "not anyone's fault"....providence isn't at play here . In all, it leaves an impression that is too cavalierly exculpatory. Sorry, guys .

Briefly, I'm sure Geno has a playbook with more dynamic play sets than an exclusionary all-must--fit-or-sit allusion. I'm also certain that the Stewie/Mo/Tuck legacy would not have been "jeopardized" had Geno settled for 20-pt wins instead of 40, wasting so many golden opportunities to produce greater team equilibrium, with a better prepared big in particular, ahead of the "rude awakening" scenario Geno himself created, then accurately prophesied. An 8-man rotation was the most effective for Geno to deliver on a better prepared and sufficiently ready starting 5, post Trinity Ascension and Geno Coronation....it didn't happen. I'm confident that Geno and staff can walk and chew gum at the same time,...they just got caught up with the transcendence of the season, and laid an egg for tomorrow .

I'm busy too- don't have time to respond other than ask what is your prediction for this year. I'll respond to other stuff when I have a chance and read it through.

 

[hoophuskee]

(hoophuskee....I owe you a reply from a previous post and your most recent one....I'll catch up)

Interesting replies to my criticism of Geno in mishandling NB and adversely impacting the team's 2016 prospects. I have to stand by my contentions....explanations, justifications and rationalizations notwithstanding .

I was expecting a spirited defense of Geno, but am quite surprised at his wholesale acquittal. Plausible deniability would have been a nebulous but more acceptable cover, but I sensed instead a unified front exempting Geno from answerability, thus culpability. UConn in November will not be what it should be, and it's not "not anyone's fault"....providence isn't at play here . In all, it leaves an impression that is too cavalierly exculpatory. Sorry, guys .

Briefly, I'm sure Geno has a playbook with more dynamic play sets than an exclusionary all-must--fit-or-sit allusion. I'm also certain that the Stewie/Mo/Tuck legacy would not have been "jeopardized" had Geno settled for 20-pt wins instead of 40, wasting so many golden opportunities to produce greater team equilibrium, with a better prepared big in particular, ahead of the "rude awakening" scenario Geno himself created, then accurately prophesied. An 8-man rotation was the most effective for Geno to deliver on a better prepared and sufficiently ready starting 5, post Trinity Ascension and Geno Coronation....it didn't happen. I'm confident that Geno and staff can walk and chew gum at the same time,...they just got caught up with the transcendence of the season, and laid an egg for tomorrow .

\

I also meant to ask so you know we aren't going to be any good in November (which I wouldn't necessarily agree)- so what's your prediction for this year? If you think we're going to be good - so what is the issue? That we won't be perfect?

 

[islandgurl]

Kibitzer....appreciate the compliment. I'm still trying to get a handle on the posters here, on just this one thread, as I don't have the time to surf much. I'd like to leave comments on various threads I have interest in, but I would just spread myself thinly.....(um, don't get any ideas, ).
------------------------------------------

JRRRJ.....nice to meet you, thanks for your compliment and for sharing your thoughts. Please don't read more into what I write than is there .

Your first paragraph: Geno's sphere of responsibilities does have its limits, it's why I used "reasonable" as a qualifier for the wiggle room required of my premise .

Your second paragraph: It's the sport of basketball, not academic disciplines within STEM. Millions of former playground kids can fully comprehend widely used basketball terms such as screens, weaves, pick-and-rolls, weak side, backdoor cuts, fakes, switch, etc. Repeating myself, Geno and staff can in fact walk and chew gum at the same time, while play sets within a dynamic playbook aren't designed as exclusionary, wherein all players must fit or they sit. Play sets are nothing more than artful choreography in a sports setting, it can be simple, complex and everything in between, but it's art, not science .

Your third paragraph: Uconn practices may be "harder than games" (or not, in and of itself it's irrelevant)....but no amount of practice sessions can substitute for game experience. It's just not the same thing. Practice tough isn't the equivalent of game tough, never will be. Most importantly, the stakes aren't the same....games are the moments in time athletes strive for, it's where winning and losing takes place, it's why the game is played....there never will be banners reading "practice session national champs"....or trophies for "practice session MVP" .

 

[RSHERMVIKES]

------------------------------------------

Your third paragraph: Uconn practices may be "harder than games" (or not, in and of itself it's irrelevant)....but no amount of practice sessions can substitute for game experience. It's just not the same thing. Practice tough isn't the equivalent of game tough, never will be. Most importantly, the stakes aren't the same....games are the moments in time athletes strive for, it's where winning and losing takes place, it's why the game is played....there never will be banners reading "practice session national champs"....or trophies for "practice session MVP" .

islandgurl- - -That's what sets UCONN apart from all the other Div. I teams, that their practices are tougher than their games! Ask any UCONN player, an alum or a player with experience now on the roster, and they'll let you know that Geno and staff make practices so hard, and sometimes impossible to succeed that when they're in a game the pressure the opponents give them is nothing like they had in practice the previous week!
6v3, 8v4, matchups with starters getting the 3 or 4 spots! Throwing in the male practice players, starting a 5 minute drill and starters are 1 or 2 pts. are winning with 5 seconds left, Geno resets the clock +10 minutes, or he'll decide to pick out 1 player, usually a "star" player such as Stewie and run her drill for 30 to 40 minutes over and over and over mean while screaming at her I thought you're an AA? I thought you were the best? Until Stewie is near tears and is so tired by then she can't do the drill!
Alums like DT say from Nov. to Feb. you're a no body, Geno tears you down, but by Tournament time Geno makes you feel like you can do and achieve anything!
That's why ND, Baylor, TX, SoCar, MD, etc. cannot compete with UCONN, no one else pressures their players the way Geno does his!

 

[islandgurl]

I have to say -- you disagree with such style. A pleasure to go back and forth.

You're right- I do place no blame because I see no blame that needs to be placed. I don't agree with the philosophy that a coach fails if some fo his recruits don't pan out. the obligation should be more to the team. And for that I believe it is right to play the best players. that imo is most fair in addition to giving the team not only the best chance to win (while being the most fair_ but also perpetuates great - consistent recruiting especially of the star players.

When I speak of "most fair" -- I'm also talking about the kids like KLS and Collier and Gabby for example. For example -- can't we agree that KLS and Napheesa need to get tougher? And KLS needs to be more aggressive? So for 2016-2017 wouldn't it also help them to play more last year? they are not going to be power players this upcoming year regardless but doesn't it help them to learn to keep playing? What about Geno's "obligation and sense of fairness" to them?

Sure you could blame Gneo this year of whatever because most likely he won't win a title-- but if Natalie comes to play this year -- and dominate practices like she should thus gets minutes-- it would mean she had BOTH deserved the minutes this year and imo when you add a good player to your team - usually you have better chance of winning too (unless they affect synergy- BOTH on offense and defense). I think patience is best virtue here. Let's see what Natalie brings THIS YEAR.

I'm not ready to write her off. And as for blame---- he Geno has won 4 straight titles. I think UCONN is ranked in the top 5 this upcoming year then imo we are among the top two looking out into the future. Boykin left him- so one year we aren't in the top two and all the wins we've accumulated and championships- how much time do I want put "on blame" when I prefer better basketball players over size? I agree we need some bulk and this year without MB we don't have it-- BUT SHE HAS HER CHANCE THIS YEAR. I am excited to see what she can bring.

But imo the other players also deserved minutes and them playing together last year for as many minutes as they did (KLS/Collier/Gabby/Nurse) also helps for this year. PLUS imo it helps in recruiting. For example Meg Walker must know if she commits to UCONN - if the post play is weak - she'll still have an opportunity to get big minutes because Geno won't be afraid to play small.

hoophuskee....it's my pleasure as well swapping impressions with you. I do at times disagree strongly with opposing views, but I realize it works both ways. When at an impasse, I'll leave it be and move on, I just don't have the time to persist. I'm feeling the effects of more holiday celebration than planned...I'll do my best not to come off sassy . I have this personal disclosure I'm soo tempted to blurt out, but i won't....sorry .

I never said we aren't going to be good, but I do think we're going to get beat early on by ranked teams with good big(s). The-Mighty-Huskies-are-beatable is an inevitability which will give a confidence boost to our subsequent opponents. Instead of playing us with trepidation, they will play us hard.

Reiterating how I think this year might go....we're still a Top 10 team, we may go undefeated in conference play. I'm hoping we lose no more than 5 games going into March Madness. If a few factors fall nicely in place, we should contend as deep as the EE....a FF is a long shot.

There is no "issue" other than Geno mishandling Nat, predictably leading to wishful thinking by some that Nat can make up this year what she was held back from last year, No she can't, not in terms of aggregate UConn on-court experience....she'd still be missing out on nearly a year's worth of playing key minutes with starters, acquiring the requisite mental toughness, etc.

Piggy-backing on this topic: targeted player development initiatives improve our chances of reaching greater heights, even if only incrementally, be it SS, EE, FF, a NC.....(given the resources we have, I can't envision a "perfect"---or undefeated---season happening....it would parallel a NC).

If Nat if going to be primed this year, then she's a big I'd still rather have than not. But if she doesn't/didn't have it in her, that should have been settled last year and shouldn't still be debated this year, drawing needless wishful thinking .

 

[Buzzyboy]

Welcome aboard. Very surprised that an "Island" gurl would pick Stef over Tina Charles for a All-UCONN team. Which Island are you reppin?

My thoughts exactly. I like Stef but Tina would make the team better. You don't need flexibility from all supposed five positions. Flex from the others would more be more than enough.

 

[victor64]

Islandgurl's eloquent prose about the staff's handling of Natalie Butler reminded me that as fabulous a coach that Geno is, he is not perfect. No coach is.

In Butler's case, there must be stuff behind the scenes that limited Butler's time once she was healthy. I was struck by how late she got into games even blowouts.

I don't buy the scheme issue. They are faced with the same situation this year with only one big. Why was it not possible for this nearly perfect staff to project ahead a little and experiment with an early Butler rotation against a significant portion of the AAC schedule?

I find it odd that the questions I have about Butler (Pass out of the high post, be effective in transition, not hurt them when they press) were not really addressed in the limited games I saw (I live in Ohio).

Looking forward to many more observations from Islandgurl...

 

[hoophuskee]

hoophuskee....it's my pleasure as well swapping impressions with you. I do at times disagree strongly with opposing views, but I realize it works both ways. When at an impasse, I'll leave it be and move on, I just don't have the time to persist. I'm feeling the effects of more holiday celebration than planned...I'll do my best not to come off sassy . I have this personal disclosure I'm soo tempted to blurt out, but i won't....sorry .

I never said we aren't going to be good, but I do think we're going to get beat early on by ranked teams with good big(s). The-Mighty-Huskies-are-beatable is an inevitability which will give a confidence boost to our subsequent opponents. Instead of playing us with trepidation, they will play us hard.

Reiterating how I think this year might go....we're still a Top 10 team, we may go undefeated in conference play. I'm hoping we lose no more than 5 games going into March Madness. If a few factors fall nicely in place, we should contend as deep as the EE....a FF is a long shot.

There is no "issue" other than Geno mishandling Nat, predictably leading to wishful thinking by some that Nat can make up this year what she was held back from last year, No she can't, not in terms of aggregate UConn on-court experience....she'd still be missing out on nearly a year's worth of playing key minutes with starters, acquiring the requisite mental toughness, etc.

Piggy-backing on this topic: targeted player development initiatives improve our chances of reaching greater heights, even if only incrementally, be it SS, EE, FF, a NC.....(given the resources we have, I can't envision a "perfect"---or undefeated---season happening....it would parallel a NC).

If Nat if going to be primed this year, then she's a big I'd still rather have than not. But if she doesn't/didn't have it in her, that should have been settled last year and shouldn't still be debated this year, drawing needless wishful thinking .

IMO you are so wrong on everything. I don't know where to begin. You might be right we only go to E8, but most fans think E8 or FF but no title- but many think that too. Everything else I either disagree with and am stunned with some your comments. Probably has to do with you and I have a completely differ point of view of the game should be played. I still can't believe you referred to Tim Duncan as finesse forward. And while I agree for example I'm not a fan of Shaq - I recognize him as an all-time great among the top 10-12 players ever. I can't recall your posts directly but they weren't overall so flattering of Shaq. Even the fantasy teams we put together - we "disputed" Bird vs MoJeff etc. So are disputes are more than just Geno. It's how we want to see the game played and who we appreciate more in terms of style etc.

Here are eight points to consider:
1--- When has anyone ever known for Geno to play for next year? I can't recall. So if anyone can - let me know. Unless hsi tema isn't that good or underperforms. For anyone that can't bring up an example - then how can they knock Geno's methods when he has been so successful in winning and sustainment? IMO playing for next year is NOT the thing to do unless you aren't that good. On the flip side I thought Brianna Banks should have gotten more minutes. But can I knock Geno for it? He lost one game the next year! And it had to do with defense and penetration. So do I blame teh defeat on Geno? For what purpose- one regular season game? But the year he goes undefeateg while getting two straight years of titles after she left!! Then he keeps recruiting like a wildman!! You have to take this into account similarly with Nat. Being an E8 team which islandgulr thinks-- we're not that good? I'm a fan. I can appreciate an E8 team which has imo a chance to be better too. I'm not that spoiled that I need to see titles every year. I'll still enjoy watching.

2-- Do you think Geno could be hurt at all trying to recruit stars if they know that someone like Stewie even in her Soph, Jr and SR years combined couldn't muster an average over 29 minutes per game? How many minutes should we drop arguably the best ever so we can give minutes Nat?

3-- Many of you have to realize the game has changed. Look at final four. MoJeff, The Cuse Guard, the kid from Washington and the Oregon guard - a lot of what these team did was a lot to do with their guards. Stewie just happens to be GOAT or close to it. There is rarely a Stewie. so guards are crucial. Your bigs don't need to be stars. The NBA is giving us a view as to how the game is going smaller but that doesn't mean bigs aren't needed. If the big isn't that good you don't penalize the ones that are good. You can't just look at it under Nats purview. The other players need synergy too- and if they are better they should get it.

4-- I think it's way wrong/bizarre for you to even suggest that Nat can't makeup the year in terms of being solid for this upcoming year. Unless you don't think she is that good. Then that is understandable. ANd if she isn't that good- she doesn't deserve the minutes.

5-- For those of you that wanted more minutes for Nat- whose minutes do you decline?

6-- Why doe Geno continually get the top recruits? When anyone says he is the best- why is he the best? For example, what is it that he is doing that sustains his ability to get the top recruits?

7--- Anybody that has watched many games - has heard Geno sometimes in rage (sometimes not) say things like "I don't care about the score . . ." or "I don't care about 'this or that'.. . we're going to play this type of style or the kid won't play . . ." I encourage anyone who agrees with islandgurl to look at the following box keep in mind UCONN was playing a tough foe in 06-07 -a ranked team at their building and Charde Houston as a junior was having her best season. As the team's 2nd best player- why didn't Charde play more minutes in this game? Because he expects a certain level of play vs a player's capabilities. If he doesn't get it- which he didn't get from Natalie- that player isn't going to play over the others that are doing better.

6/5 Connecticut vs 16/18 Marquette (02/03/07 at Milwaukee, Wis. (Al McGuire Center))


8-- He uses playing time as his motivation to his players. Islandgurl seems to suggest that because Nat didn't get many minutes this past year she'll somehow be affected in a negative manner -- when she needed to get those minutes in order to "acquiring the requisite mental toughness, etc." So a player under Geno -- it's either one year or that's it? We often call him the best coach in wcbb. So a player with the skills of Nat -and if she is good - we're to believe islandgurl that Geno will be nearly incapable of turning her around because of his blunder the year before? But this is how Geno has coached. He doesn't coach - giving players minutes that don't deserve minutes. He expects a style of play and he uses minutes as his motivational tool for the player to do what he wants. The way islandgurl makes it sound, why should Nat even show up this year? Is Geno wrong with his coaching style? Because he does seem to continue to get the top recruits, right? SO wouldn't it stand to reason that threat of minutes is a good tool? A boneyarder posted Geno has said going into this year the most important player is Gabby. Islandgurl didn't say this but to her it seems so much about Nat. Maybe she is right--

but for me I think you go with the better basketball player. The game is more guard oriented and you can always double the post. We're playing other college teams- not pros. A double team doesn't always mean the other team will make the right passes (many bigs are terrible passers and can't defend outside the lane) and hit the outside shots. And I do think NB can be good this year. And even if she isn't- I do think she can contribute only that she'll get inconsistent minutes. But it is possible that she just isn't that good. Let's not make excuses because oit. The best has always gotten the minutes. The championships and the recruiting over time have clearly shown there is no reason to break this tried-and-true method. The quality and style of play is more important to Geno than what islandgurl mentioned about winning by 40 or 20 points. That point total means nothing to Geno. And until he starts failing - I see no reason to try another way.

 

[islandgurl]

IMO you are so wrong on everything. I don't know where to begin. You might be right we only go to E8, but most fans think E8 or FF but no title- but many think that too. Everything else I either disagree with and am stunned with some your comments. Probably has to do with you and I have a completely differ point of view of the game should be played. I still can't believe you referred to Tim Duncan as finesse forward. And while I agree for example I'm not a fan of Shaq - I recognize him as an all-time great among the top 10-12 players ever. I can't recall your posts directly but they weren't overall so flattering of Shaq. Even the fantasy teams we put together - we "disputed" Bird vs MoJeff etc. So are disputes are more than just Geno. It's how we want to see the game played and who we appreciate more in terms of style etc.

Here are eight points to consider:
1--- When has anyone ever known for Geno to play for next year? I can't recall. So if anyone can - let me know. Unless hsi tema isn't that good or underperforms. For anyone that can't bring up an example - then how can they knock Geno's methods when he has been so successful in winning and sustainment? IMO playing for next year is NOT the thing to do unless you aren't that good. On the flip side I thought Brianna Banks should have gotten more minutes. But can I knock Geno for it? He lost one game the next year! And it had to do with defense and penetration. So do I blame teh defeat on Geno? For what purpose- one regular season game? But the year he goes undefeateg while getting two straight years of titles after she left!! Then he keeps recruiting like a wildman!! You have to take this into account similarly with Nat. Being an E8 team which islandgulr thinks-- we're not that good? I'm a fan. I can appreciate an E8 team which has imo a chance to be better too. I'm not that spoiled that I need to see titles every year. I'll still enjoy watching.

2-- Do you think Geno could be hurt at all trying to recruit stars if they know that someone like Stewie even in her Soph, Jr and SR years combined couldn't muster an average over 29 minutes per game? How many minutes should we drop arguably the best ever so we can give minutes Nat?

3-- Many of you have to realize the game has changed. Look at final four. MoJeff, The Cuse Guard, the kid from Washington and the Oregon guard - a lot of what these team did was a lot to do with their guards. Stewie just happens to be GOAT or close to it. There is rarely a Stewie. so guards are crucial. Your bigs don't need to be stars. The NBA is giving us a view as to how the game is going smaller but that doesn't mean bigs aren't needed. If the big isn't that good you don't penalize the ones that are good. You can't just look at it under Nats purview. The other players need synergy too- and if they are better they should get it.

4-- I think it's way wrong/bizarre for you to even suggest that Nat can't makeup the year in terms of being solid for this upcoming year. Unless you don't think she is that good. Then that is understandable. ANd if she isn't that good- she doesn't deserve the minutes.

5-- For those of you that wanted more minutes for Nat- whose minutes do you decline?

6-- Why doe Geno continually get the top recruits? When anyone says he is the best- why is he the best? For example, what is it that he is doing that sustains his ability to get the top recruits?

7--- Anybody that has watched many games - has heard Geno sometimes in rage (sometimes not) say things like "I don't care about the score . . ." or "I don't care about 'this or that'.. . we're going to play this type of style or the kid won't play . . ." I encourage anyone who agrees with islandgurl to look at the following box keep in mind UCONN was playing a tough foe in 06-07 -a ranked team at their building and Charde Houston as a junior was having her best season. As the team's 2nd best player- why didn't Charde play more minutes in this game? Because he expects a certain level of play vs a player's capabilities. If he doesn't get it- which he didn't get from Natalie- that player isn't going to play over the others that are doing better.

6/5 Connecticut vs 16/18 Marquette (02/03/07 at Milwaukee, Wis. (Al McGuire Center))


8-- He uses playing time as his motivation to his players. Islandgurl seems to suggest that because Nat didn't get many minutes this past year she'll somehow be affected in a negative manner -- when she needed to get those minutes in order to "acquiring the requisite mental toughness, etc." So a player under Geno -- it's either one year or that's it? We often call him the best coach in wcbb. So a player with the skills of Nat -and if she is good - we're to believe islandgurl that Geno will be nearly incapable of turning her around because of his blunder the year before? But this is how Geno has coached. He doesn't coach - giving players minutes that don't deserve minutes. He expects a style of play and he uses minutes as his motivational tool for the player to do what he wants. The way islandgurl makes it sound, why should Nat even show up this year? Is Geno wrong with his coaching style? Because he does seem to continue to get the top recruits, right? SO wouldn't it stand to reason that threat of minutes is a good tool? A boneyarder posted Geno has said going into this year the most important player is Gabby. Islandgurl didn't say this but to her it seems so much about Nat. Maybe she is right--

but for me I think you go with the better basketball player. The game is more guard oriented and you can always double the post. We're playing other college teams- not pros. A double team doesn't always mean the other team will make the right passes (many bigs are terrible passers and can't defend outside the lane) and hit the outside shots. And I do think NB can be good this year. And even if she isn't- I do think she can contribute only that she'll get inconsistent minutes. But it is possible that she just isn't that good. Let's not make excuses because oit. The best has always gotten the minutes. The championships and the recruiting over time have clearly shown there is no reason to break this tried-and-true method. The quality and style of play is more important to Geno than what islandgurl mentioned about winning by 40 or 20 points. That point total means nothing to Geno. And until he starts failing - I see no reason to try another way.

Hi hoophuskee.....

You went from...."I have to say -- you disagree with such style. A pleasure to go back and forth.".....to "IMO you are so wrong on everything. I don't know where to begin."....to putting me down as "way wrong/bizarre", with a litany of unwarranted criticism .

Is how I think of Tim Duncan and Shaq that objectionable?

I haven't a clue what exactly set you off....perhaps being zealously protective of Geno....and reading far more into what I wrote than is there .

There's no need to get so upset, let's just agree to disagree, we'll stay out of each other's way, and we'll keep the peace. Fair enough? Take care of yourself .

 

[islandgurl]

Islandgurl's eloquent prose about the staff's handling of Natalie Butler reminded me that as fabulous a coach that Geno is, he is not perfect. No coach is.

In Butler's case, there must be stuff behind the scenes that limited Butler's time once she was healthy. I was struck by how late she got into games even blowouts.

I don't buy the scheme issue. They are faced with the same situation this year with only one big. Why was it not possible for this nearly perfect staff to project ahead a little and experiment with an early Butler rotation against a significant portion of the AAC schedule?

I find it odd that the questions I have about Butler (Pass out of the high post, be effective in transition, not hurt them when they press) were not really addressed in the limited games I saw (I live in Ohio).

Looking forward to many more observations from Islandgurl...

RSHERMVIKES.....I stand by my position. Sorry .
What "sets UConn apart" isn't its hard practices. It's winning games, consistently.
Thing is, you have to have players sufficiently talented to make that happen on game days....plus, of course, all the other nice things like great coaching, player coachability, synergy, a dynamic playbook....and yes, hard practices .
The most brutal practice sessions doesn't mean a thing if you don't/can't win games consistently.
Practice is practice....games are games....you don't win practices, but you gotta win games.

The entirety of your practices-tougher-than-games logic also suggests that UConn-style strenuous practice sessions would, or would have, "set apart" last year's iteration of RMU, MSSU, Duquesne, etc. Given such a basis, were we to re-play the games, we would have blown them out just the same .
---------------------------------------
Bussyboy....it's nice to meet you. Thanks for your input. I'm still good with Stef .
---------------------------------------

victor64....it's nice to meet you. Thanks for your support on my issue with Geno's handling of Nat. Contrastingly, someone felt my head ought to be handed to me for such irreverence .
Observations for another time....I'll offer a brief thought instead about the coming season.
I'm confident that Kia, KLS, Gabby and Napheesa are a lock as 4 of the starters for 2016....it's theirs to lose.
For November and for about the first 3rd of the season, unprepared as Nat might be, Geno may not have much of a choice using her as his 5th starter. If Nat starts, hopefully she'll exceed expectations.

I had the intent of following up on this in the "What about 2016" thread, but I just noticed it has been effectively hijacked by posts on baseball. It's no longer a viable thread about its original topic. I then came across an old "UConn 2016-2017 starters" thread, but it's pretty much dated, last post was April 23.
So, I'm kind of homeless with what should be a relevant discussion topic, if observed and administered as intended.

 

[RSHERMVIKES]

RSHERMVIKES.....I stand by my position. Sorry .
What "sets UConn apart" isn't its hard practices. It's winning games, consistently.
Thing is, you have to have players sufficiently talented to make that happen on game days....plus, of course, all the other nice things like great coaching, player coachability, synergy, a dynamic playbook....and yes, hard practices .
The most brutal practice sessions doesn't mean a thing if you don't/can't win games consistently.
Practice is practice....games are games....you don't win practices, but you gotta win games.

The entirety of your practices-tougher-than-games logic also suggests that UConn-style strenuous practice sessions would, or would have, "set apart" last year's iteration of RMU, MSSU, Duquesne, etc. Given such a basis, were we to re-play the games, we would have blown them out just the same .
---------------------------------------
islandgurl- - - You can believe whatever YOU want but all that matters is the UCONN players believe the reason they play with so few errors and so hard and win so often is their practices eliminate the mistakes by working on perfecting what they run! The players say "no-one is perfect but we practice as close to perfect as we can get every day and that gives us the edge in our games, nobody outworks us!"
It's cause and effect one causes the other the to happen! Doris Burke swears by UCONN's work ethic causing their outstanding won/loss record!

 

[RSHERMVIKES]

Please CLICK TO EXPAND on my reply to islandgurl above to see my full comments.

 

[DaddyChoc]

Please CLICK TO EXPAND on my reply to islandgurl above to see my full comments.

sometimes its easier to cut the "fat" of the quoted.... carefully use the backspace feature but do not bother the "quotes" [/QUOTE]

then you wouldnt need to "expand"

 

[islandgurl]

islandgurl- - - You can believe whatever YOU want but all that matters is the UCONN players believe the reason they play with so few errors and so hard and win so often is their practices eliminate the mistakes by working on perfecting what they run! The players say "no-one is perfect but we practice as close to perfect as we can get every day and that gives us the edge in our games, nobody outworks us!"
It's cause and effect one causes the other the to happen! Doris Burke swears by UCONN's work ethic causing their outstanding won/loss record!

RSHERMVIKES.....

Your argument should stand on its own merits....without the need to accentuate it in bold and in red, or capitalize YOU to suggest I don't "matter". Neither will make your argument any more peremptory .

I respect Doris Burke's learned opinions....like her, I greatly admire UConn's work ethics.

I've made my points....I see no need to rehash .