SC vs LSU

[Gamecockfan77]

South Carolina wins first and foremost because of defense and rebounding.

Secondarily, South Carolina wins because it a good offensive team with fairly balanced scoring and is quite deep when it wants to be, though not as much so in tightly contested games.

Nearly everyone SC has played tries to limit the front court damage and invite our guards to score from perimeter.

 

[GamecockFam]

I've watched about a dozen full SC games and most of the rest as ~30 minute highlights, and I've seen everyone fail to outplay the backcourt enough to outweigh the scoring of the front court. I don't know what you mean by inverting the issue and saying "junk defenses" couldn't stop Boston and Cardozo. The point of stopping Zia and Raven and Brea, et al on the perimeter, is so it doesn't matter what Boston and Cardoso do, while you imagine it's about crowding the paint to stop them. [Is this where I'm supposed to say "Um, what?"]

But, to the point: if you can't beat an opponent where they are strong, you attack them where they are less strong... and then you hope the differential is enough to negate their strength. Stanford is the only team that might be able to compete in the front court. Everyone else is stuck hoping to outclass the backcourt enough to negate the front court advantage. The fact that no one has succeeded at this -- the only strategy open to them -- is that their backcourts have not been sufficiently better. And this is a fact I mentioned in my original comment.

Case in point in the UConn game -- Boston and Cardoso scored 43, while Cooke, Beal, Fletcher and Hall scored 16. But Johnson put in 14 -- she had as good a game as you can have while shooting 33% and that was more than enough to win. On UConn's side, Lopez-Senechal, Griffin and Muhl scored 47 and Edwards and Juhasz added 30, but that was not enough to take the win. In other words, UConn's backcourt only outscored SC's backcourt by 17. I don't see any other team being able to do better in this sort of comparison against SC, which is why I expect they'll repeat as NC. If Stanford is going to prevail, their front court has to win it for them, not their backcourt -- and I don't see that happening.

I would argue that the UConn game was the exception to the rule (as was the case for most of the good teams we faced...LSU, Stanford, etc.). I agree that was part of the UConn strategy. But I believe this is incorrect analysis for the majority of the games South Carolina has played this season against outmatched opponents. I don't have enough hands to count how many times our guards were left alone on the perimeter to shoot the ball while the opponent tried to box out the bigs and prevent them from getting touches on rebounds and entry passes. That does not seem like a strategy to stop the guards. If anything they are hoping our guards shoot the ball more often and praying that our bigs don't grab the rebound.

 

[Cornell Lt]

I would agree that SC is the prohibited favorite for the NC. But we all know one injury to the wrong player will alter any teams fate.

 

[SCGamecock]

This thread is no longer about Sunday’s game so a new thread should probably be started.

 

[Bone Dog]

I would argue that the UConn game was the exception to the rule (as was the case for most of the good teams we faced...LSU, Stanford, etc.). I agree that was part of the UConn strategy. But I believe this is incorrect analysis for the majority of the games South Carolina has played this season against outmatched opponents. I don't have enough hands to count how many times our guards were left alone on the perimeter to shoot the ball while the opponent tried to box out the bigs and prevent them from getting touches on rebounds and entry passes. That does not seem like a strategy to stop the guards. If anything they are hoping our guards shoot the ball more often and praying that our bigs don't grab the rebound.

First, just to get this out of the way, I'll quote @ThatCG1801 to the effect that if we had to take a shot every time the phrase that "was the exception to the rule" etc. etc. etc. blah blah blah.

If we had a "take a shot every time the phrase 'our very depleted line-up' is mentioned" game happening in this thread, we'd all be snot slinging drunk.

But you make a good point. The SC backcourt did get lots of open shots this season against many teams -- though they didn't make a ton of them, especially early on. Your interpretation of this might be right that most opponents weren't focusing on them, and this allowed them to pack the paint in a futile effort. But I think there's a subset of this season in which opponents wanted to focus on the guards but were simply outclassed, and another subset in which they attempted it but were not successful enough, yet another in which an opposing coach thought some of the guards could be left open (dared?) to shoot because they didn't shoot all that well. And in the first part of the season -- in the cupcake-OOC segment -- teams who simply hadn't gelled enough yet to carry out a coherent strategy. All this is merely meant to say that there's room for differing interpretations of how opponents tried to play against SC.

 

[Darwin]

She's 10/46. 22%.

Up to this year she's never averaged more than 1 attempt a game.

Now she averages 1.5.

Pretty good for a 5 imo, she is dangerous from outside, you have to guard her.

 

[Darwin]

First, just to get this out of the way, I'll quote @ThatCG1801 to the effect that if we had to take a shot every time the phrase that "was the exception to the rule" etc. etc. etc. blah blah blah.

But you make a good point. The SC backcourt did get lots of open shots this season against many teams -- though they didn't make a ton of them, especially early on. Your interpretation of this might be right that most opponents weren't focusing on them, and this allowed them to pack the paint in a futile effort. But I think there's a subset of this season in which opponents wanted to focus on the guards but were simply outclassed, and another subset in which they attempted it but were not successful enough, yet another in which an opposing coach thought some of the guards could be left open (dared?) to shoot because they didn't shoot all that well. And in the first part of the season -- in the cupcake-OOC segment -- teams who simply hadn't gelled enough yet to carry out a coherent strategy. All this is merely meant to say that there's room for differing interpretations of how opponents tried to play against SC.

They all have had one common denominator, double (sometimes triple) Boston when she gets the ball in the post. Been a staple all season. Up to the perimeter players to make them pay for that strategy.

 

[Bone Dog]

They all have had one common denominator, double (sometimes triple) Boston when she gets the ball in the post. Been a staple all season. Up to the perimeter players to make them pay for that strategy.

In the first half of the season, how often was the ball passed back out of the post for a perimeter shot? I haven't done a detailed study, but I'd estimate not very often. And why should it have been? Once Boston gets the ball down low, why pass it out when she can just score? If that's the reality, why wouldn't a smaller weaker team not collapse into the paint on those occasions? But that doesn't mean they weren't trying to keep the guards from getting open shots... trying and not succeeding.

 

[Darwin]

The poster who said that it’s probably best to just let SC perimeter players take their shots and focus on the defense within the paint is prob correct, because that is the strategy that seems to slow down SC the most.

If you leave Boston/Cardoso in single coverage down low it’s lights out. Size matters.

 

[TC22]

You don't consider Dorka Juhasz to be a good post player?

I could have worded that better. Until UConn, the only team we had played with 2 good post players was Stanford. Since we didn’t defend the post vs UConn very well it was obvious we made some adjustments before the LSU game.

 

[Heytherego]

Pretty good for a 5 imo, she is dangerous from outside, you have to guard her.

It’s not, she’s not dangerous from the outside at all. I really don’t think any team is game planning around Brink’s outside shooting. Let her shoot

 

[Darwin]

It’s not, she’s not dangerous from the outside at all. I really don’t think any team is game planning around Brink’s outside shooting. Let her shoot

Is that right?

 

[Heytherego]

Is that right?

In what world is 22% shooting good…22% 3PT shooters don’t get guarded out there. Have at it Brink!