And yet, in 2 of those 3 years UConn made it back to the FF. If UConn has 12 healthy players at the start of the season, with as much talent as this team will have, they’ll be just fine.
I think the people like me that are arguing for more than 12 could be doing so for a variety of reasons. It doesn't necessarily mean we are facing a disaster, we won't be very good with 12, or we can't get far in the tournament even with a setback or two.
What we accomplished in those injury plagued years was pretty amazing all things considered, but remember we had at least one game where we had the legal minimum of 7 players available, and I believe that was with a roster of 14. If we had the same number of injuries that year with a roster of 12 some games would have been forfeits.
So there is the argument of injury insurance even if the incoming player has little change of beating out a rotation player. Having said that, there were at least a half dozen bigs, mostly 4's that could have cracked the rotation in my opinion. Yes that might have affected someone's playing time who is viewed as pretty good or potentially good like say Morgan.
I know I am in the minority on this point, but many were interested in Lee, despite the fact that if she came, the minutes of proven high level players like Ash, Allie, Kayleigh would be reduced and put Kellis and Jovanna even further from relevance. But when the discussion turns to the bigs, when we don't even have one natural backup 4, some seem concerned about how it might affect say Morgan's potential playing time, even though the 4 is not her best position, and despite her not yet achieving the level of success of many of our guards, and coming off an injury that lingered far longer than original expected.
Blanca should be the starter at the 3, play her natural position for most of the year, and not need to be used at the 4 this year. Hopefully IMO the same is true for Sarah not being needed at the 5, or Ash at the 3. I don't mind having a very good small ball option, and using it when it is the best choice, but having very good traditional lineups, used only part of the time last year, and a viable "big" option are important too.
What is a big option? Olivia at the 4, Sarah at the 3 and Blanca at the 2. Geno of course has favored the small ball options, at least partly because he has more confidence in his guards than his centers, and he may feel the same way this year if Jana doesn't show significant improvement. but a player like Brown, Carlton, or O'Neal would have given Geno the option to play Sarah quite a bit at the 3, and go big more often.
Having said that I realize it would be a pretty hard sell to any of those players to come here when they see the national player of the year ahead of them on the depth chart. Using Sarah quite a bit at the 3 would probably be a necessary part of the discussion to have them even consider Uconn. We also probably couldn't justify much compensation for a 13th player as well, and that factor might argue for smaller rosters.
In the WNBA that was certainly true. With a salary cap and the option of having either 11 or 12 players, many teams chose 11 because they would rather spend that spots salary to upgrade a player in the rotation. Maybe the same thing is happening in college basketball.
I am disappointed we didn't get a 4, but realize getting a rotation worthy player behind Sarah was a pretty big challenge. I also think just an injury insurance backup 4 was worth pursuing as well. In a perfect world for most seasons I think 13 would be a good number. A starter with a designated backup for each position in a rotation of 10, with three injury backups or development players, one guard, one wing, and one big, But of course that never happens in real life.
