Something to think about

[fairluvwar]

This is not a personal knock on MW, as some would lead you to believe because any basketball criticism you have instantly means you are making a personal attack on the girls apparently, but out of curiosity what game against a top level team has Meg shot well against in her 3 years at UConn? I don't recall one. To me that's the definition of "not showing up". Not because shes heavily focused on or guarded and is forced into taking difficult shots. She just for whatever reason can't hit the broad side of a barn against the top competition. It's a trend it's a habit, to me it's become her identity. CW, outside of that first Notre Dame game is trending that way some as well. No one cares if you can average 20 pts a game against inferior competition, this is all about those small handful of games every year and the ones deep in the tourney.

I appreciate those eternally optimistic positive half cup full people but at a certain point, come on. It becomes delusion. We know what this team is, and it's not very good. They're good. Period. End of sentence. Not great not even very good, just good. They have talent but they lack the competitive edge and the ability to put it all together. Every year we talk about the handful of teams that have a shot to win a championship, and that handful may be growing slightly in the womens game. It does not include UConn this year, it just doesn't. Doesn't mean we dont still love them and root for them like crazy. But this is supposed to be a forum for people to express their views and opinions and insights and those dont always have to be blasting sunshine up everyone's butts. We are allowed to criticize basketball skill without it meaning it's a personal attack on someone.

 

[Steelerone]

What I always notice about fans' comments on almost every site is the perspective that if some of their players just shot better, or played their A-game they would have won. What they fail to consider is that the other team had might have had players who could also have shot better.

This is where depth comes in handy. Teams with depth will have players who can take up the slack if one of their teammates has a sub-par shooting game. Players are never going to consistently shoot well every game. When player A is not on, often player B has a better than average shooting game to compensate. The one thing in basketball that can be counted on every game is hustle and defense. That is something that can be improved on. Usually, a players shooting-well is as it is.

To imply that because some players could have played better makes the difference between teams not as great as the score indicated is pure rationalization, which serves no purpose other than to feed the rationalizer's perspective. In this case the fact that some Uconn players are capable of shooting better, might just as well be mitigated by the fact that some Uconn players are also capable of shooting worse. For example, Dangerfield is on a hot streak, much like Walker was when she carried the team earlier in the season. She has cooled of considerable since, while Dangerfield heated up. Things tend to even out during a season. That's basketball.

There is also the assumption that Oregon brought their A-game, implying that if Uconn would have played their A game it would have been at the least a close game. Well, that was not Oregon's A-game. They had players who did not shoot well. All of this to deflect the reality that Uconn is not on the level of the top tier teams. There is still the question if they are on the level of the second tier either. They have not really played teams that are considered the second tier. DePaul and Tenn are not second-tier teams. DePaul's lack of size was a match up made to order for them. Could they even beat a team in the top ten if they didn't catch them on an off night? They need a good showing against SC or we will not know the answer until the NCAA's.

What a great analysis Willtalk. Everything you said was right on point.

 

[Longtime fan]

That is what player development is for. And Aubrey has 2" advantage over Gabby

She may be taller, but I would take Gabby anytime in a one on one battle for a rebound.

 

[Longtime fan]

I had the same thought. Let’s hope we’re both right!

It is something to hope for. However, it requires;

1. Williams to become a reliable, all around player.
2. Walker to be on her game, and making smarter decisions
3. Olivia to improve 100% .
4. Ania to become our version of MKL
5. Crystal to be Crystal
6. Aubrey to make lay-ups and put backs
7. Inspirational coaching

It is a big ask with only 5-6 weeks remaining before the tournament begins.

 

[Plebe]

This is not a personal knock on MW, as some would lead you to believe because any basketball criticism you have instantly means you are making a personal attack on the girls apparently, but out of curiosity what game against a top level team has Meg shot well against in her 3 years at UConn? I don't recall one.

To be fair, she had a very good game against Louisville in the E8 last year, in which she hit crucial shots down the stretch. Jeff Walz said she was the difference in the game.

 

[Storrsbred]

To be fair, she had a very good game against Louisville in the E8 last year, in which she hit crucial shots down the stretch. Jeff Walz said she was the difference in the game.

Oh goody, let’s go for two games in a career.

 

[Plebe]

Oh goody, let’s go for two games in a career.

Okay well here's two: at UCLA her freshman year.

 

[JonathanXIV]

Oh goody, let’s go for two games in a career.

Is that necessary?

 

[fairluvwar]

To be fair, she had a very good game against Louisville in the E8 last year, in which she hit crucial shots down the stretch. Jeff Walz said she was the difference in the game.

Ok I stand corrected. But it still doesn't take away from the fact that overall it's the trend during her career not to play well against elite competition, particularly shooting wise.

 

[hart2hart]

I love our team! Just need more movement, cutting, assists, boxing out, and effective,
inspirational coaching then we win! Oh yeah,
play like the USA game. We were at the game and the gals were spot-on! Just LOVE our gals!

 

[jabstep]

Look no offense to you or anyone else, but I don't want to hear excuses and I am tired of hearing excuses. Excuses do not fix problems. I want results. Improvements through concrete plans to change and execute to a high level of performance on a consistent basis and not for one game, is what the fan base wants to see. The talent is there, now they have to come together.

The only way you learn how to play in big games is to play in them. Previously Meg was a 3rd,4th or 5th option last year in the offense. She is learning how to be the 1st option. Sometimes that is to look to others when your shot is off. Lou was not on in her shooting every game. Pheesa sometimes couldn't score inside against larger athletic defenders, fortunately, she could move outside and hit three's. Crystal has made the adjustment to being a primary scorer in big games the others still have to learn.

 

[SLY63]

To me the big question is where to we really rank today. I don't see us at the level of the #1 seeds (OR, Baylor, SC), but we have not played anyone at the 2-4 seed level (UCLA, NC St. Or St., Fl St., Maryland, Miss St.), and won't until the tourney. If we don't win Monday, this will be an issue in tourney seeding and ultimately we won;t really know until we see how far we go.

 

[Plebe]

To me the big question is where to we really rank today. I don't see us at the level of the #1 seeds (OR, Baylor, SC), but we have not played anyone at the 2-4 seed level (UCLA, NC St. Or St., Fl St., Maryland, Miss St.), and won't until the tourney. If we don't win Monday, this will be an issue in tourney seeding and ultimately we won;t really know until we see how far we go.

We have a win over DePaul, who is currently a 4 seed.

 

[msf22b]

Tony

I'm extraordinarily impressed that even you: the locus classicus of pure UConn fans
can voice some degree of concern and elucidate areas that could be improved.

I've always considered myself a fan of the game and secondarily of UConn.
And at times taken my lumps for it on this board.

Somehow, although this group appears to be not quite up to the level of the recent past,
I find them lovable, if imperfect, and still have hope that the disparate
elements that make up this group, can find a way to meld together
so as to maximize their potential individuals talents for the greater good.
Meaning: Don't write them off yet!

Hope springs eternal...Geno pulled it off in Stewie's freshman year after a frustrating series of ND beatdowns...that team appeared totally overwhelmed and discombobulated. ...So there are reasonable reasons that one can continue to express optimism.

But back to my main point...
Through the medium of this post...you proved yourself a true fan of the game
and of this team.

I congratulate you.

 

[Buzzyboy]

Gabby made lay-ups. And shot fouls. And was a better jumper.

Gabby was an appreciably better shooter, overall .... Aubrey is an really good athlete but hasn't shown that she's anything approaching a good basketball player .... on the offensive side of the ball, she struggles mightily....

 

[Longtime fan]

Yup.

 

[Littlemin]

I agree this is a good, not great, team. It is always tough for fans to be realistic, most fall in one of the two extremes "eternal optimists" or "the sky is falling." Neither would seem to fit for this team. I said a couple of months ago when I joined the board I do not think this team has much chemistry and I still feel that way. I don't think the team has a "collective confidence" and that deficiency has shown, obviously, in the Baylor and Oregon games but also at other times throughout the season. It has been pointed out the team lacks an "alpha" player and to some degree I agree. However, to beat a point I have made before, I believe moving Dangerfield off the ball and giving it to Makurat would be their best scenario to resolve that.
Dangerfield, IMO, is more than just terrific offensive player, borderline impossible to stop from getting a good shot but it is tough for her to maximize that playing on the ball to initiate the offense. IMO, she is a good, not great passer or facilitator. To put it another way, IMO, she does not make anyone better at the PG position. I believe she could very well enter into the "alpha" category with her main focus on creating offense for herself. Think about the Oregon game, she had to initiate the offense, score, and oh by the way, attempt to face guard the best player in the country. Too much...…..
Added, I believe that will somewhat relieve both Walker and Williams the burden of "having to score" in big games, responsibilities that both do not seem up to right now. I realize it is a small sample size and that is one of the problems with UConn, there is such a small sample size with which to really analyze the team. It is one of, but certainly not the only, reasons Auriemma and Dailey have to depend on practice performance so much.
Finally, I do believe Makurat's experience, poise and IQ would better help this team with the ball. She appears undaunted by either the opponent or magnitude of the game. Now to be clear, the biggest reason for my belief in this change is the fact it frees up Dangerfield to provide what I feel the team needs the most. I also realize it is not very likely to happen.

 

[Longtime fan]

Oh goody, let’s go for two games in a career.

I think you are saying something I will put a bit differently. In the past, when UCONN has signed a top
recruit ( HS POY, for example ), we have gotten players who. almost immediately, became reliable superstars. Maya Moore was the best of the best. But MKL and Katy Lou were pretty exciting early. And, certainly, by sophomore season were showing their ability to dominate. Megan has not been on that same trajectory...nor has Williams....both HS POYs. Megan has shown marked improvement, but she has also shown flaws which she has been slow to correct ( poor decision making, turnovers, and inconsistency ). Christen Williams has been even slower to emerge. I am struck by the comment one Boneyard member recently posted to the effect that " Williams' best game still remains her performance against Notre dame in December of her freshman year." So these top-rated players have not come close to meeting the expectations established by their predecessors. And that has been a drag on our performances against top competition. It also makes them easy targets of our frustration.

 

[fairluvwar]

Hope springs eternal...Geno pulled it off in Stewie's freshman year after a frustrating series of ND beatdowns...that team appeared totally overwhelmed and discombobulated. ...So there are reasonable reasons that one can continue to express optimism.

There were no beatdowns that year. Their losses to ND were 1 and 2 points and a triple overtime that got away at the end for a 9 pt loss, and the 6 pt loss to Baylor that if I remember correctly they had the lead in the 4th quarter. Also, the difference is that team had Stewie, and her maturation was the biggest reason that team subsequently dominated in the NCAA tournament. They also got a bit of luck of the draw not having to face Baylor, who I think they would have beaten anyway.

But this team doesn't have a player who could even touch Stewie on their best day, from her freshman year. It's not to say its impossible they could figure out a way to play cohesive smart basketball, but they are what they are. I'd venture a guess that it's very rare for a team to change that much from February to the NCAAs and I think I have seen enough of this team to understand that, while talented and loaded with potential, potential doesn't win games and this team is likely to continue to be an inconsistent enigma that just isn't among the final four contenders this year.

Hope I am wrong because I've seen every game since they came on Cptv in 1995 and every single loss has been painful and I would love nothing more then to eat my words and see this team click at the right time and fight with a ferocity we haven't seen from them yet, and make it 13 years in a row. Crossing my fingers.

 

[Longtime fan]

There were no beatdowns that year. Their losses to ND were 1 and 2 points and a triple overtime that got away at the end for a 9 pt loss, and the 6 pt loss to Baylor that if I remember correctly they had the lead in the 4th quarter. Also, the difference is that team had Stewie, and her maturation was the biggest reason that team subsequently dominated in the NCAA tournament. They also got a bit of luck of the draw not having to face Baylor, who I think they would have beaten anyway.

But this team doesn't have a player who could even touch Stewie on their best day, from her freshman year. It's not to say its impossible they could figure out a way to play cohesive smart basketball, but they are what they are. I'd venture a guess that it's very rare for a team to change that much from February to the NCAAs and I think I have seen enough of this team to understand that, while talented and loaded with potential, potential doesn't win games and this team is likely to continue to be an inconsistent enigma that just isn't among the final four contenders this year.

Hope I am wrong because I've seen every game since they came on Cptv in 1995 and every single loss has been painful and I would love nothing more then to eat my words and see this team click at the right time and fight with a ferocity we haven't seen from them yet, and make it 13 years in a row. Crossing my fingers.

I agree with you. It is a " Big Ask" to expect this team to peak in 6 weeks.

That requires Olivia to change from "learning her position" to using it to her advantage; it requires her to become a true threat shooting from distance, and to make that fade away jump shot one that cannot be stopped ( and is converted 80% of the time). It requires her to become as talented with her left hand, as she is with her right. And it requires her to be smarter on defense, whereby she can defend and pass well, block shots, and avoid foul trouble.

It requires Megan to avoid poor decisions, which have turned into unforced errors, and turnovers. It requires her to be a more reliable shooter. She is already good enough on her drives to the hoop and rebounding.

It requires Christen Williams to "jump shift" from a player with "potential" to a tenacious threat from anywhere on the court. She can't miss her first outside shot and disappear. She can't go 1-13. She can't miss lay-ups. And she has to make free throws.

Dangerfield is already there. Just stay healthy.

And our fifth starter cannot be Kyla. It has to be Makurat and she has to be cool and on her game.

I can see an important role for Griffin...as a player off the bench.... who will disrupt, create turnovers, and rebound. But she is useless if she cannot "finish" the opportunities she creates. Or be certain that a teammate will.

That ( all of the above ) is BIG ASK.

 

[fairluvwar]

Yes it is, and to your point Maukurat has to start. I've felt that way for a month. I get that at first it was about waiting for her to gain confidence and then perhaps some sort of symbolic thing with Kyla to continue to start, but for the long term chances of this team they need their most talented players to start, and they need to have as many scoring threats on the court as possible. We all love Kyla but she just is not a scoring threat and obviously has other physical and skill limitations. I believe Anna is also their smartest player and best passer. This is a completely different team with her on the court so in my opinion if theres a chance of them turning a corner its going to be with her getting as much playing time as possible. Tonight was a decent start, albeit against a bad Memphis team. But there was a difference in the way the ball moved with precision and authority and decisiveness. The passes were quick and crisp as opposed to slow and lazy. Their offensive success depends on ball and body movement. Sometimes they go through cold streaks but if they moved the ball consistently enough to get good shots more often I think those cold streaks would be fewer and farther in between. I said they have talent, their biggest problems remain between the ears.

 

[Jingo]

but, but, but how can that be because one of the BYer said that she will be the team leading scorer this year having watched her play a lot in high school.

That would be me but I blew it! haha

 

[Kevinmac]

I just reviewed Aubrey's high school statistics, such as they are available. For her HS career, she shot 65% from the free throw line. She averaged one three point conversion per game ( no data on how many shots she took ). Most of her points were 2's, and there was no break-out of lay-ups, under the basket stuff,
or 8-10- footers. Her rebounding numbers , as you would expect, stood out.

So here is my prediction: Aubrey will have an important career at UCONN as a "6th man," once we assemble a complete team again ( in 1-2 years ). She will come off the bench with high energy, disrupt the other team, cause turnovers, grab offensive rebounds and greatly improve her ability to finish, around the basket. So she will contribute far more consistently to the offense than she does now.

I believe Ania will prove ( already has to a large extent ) to be the better all around basketball player, of these two freshmen. She is far more the 5 tool player than Aubrey. Not the athlete Aubrey is, but plenty good and a better BB player.

I believe that many UCONN fans...with me at the top of the list...were hoping that Aubrey was going to "save this team" ( too many lean years of recruiting results ), as players like Turasi, Moore, and other superstar players elevated their teams to championship levels. But that will not be the case.

Aubrey, right now, is an unpolished version of what she will become. In time, she could develop into the nation's best " 6th man," or a viable candidate for that honor. And that is pretty great.

But not what we hoped.