Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="SimpleDawg, post: 3142957, member: 9267"] Define efficient? It's not like we miss a whole bunch of shots and jack up a ton of bricks. We were a high field-goal percentage shooting team. If it doesn't hurt the team, what does it matter if we win by assists (Notre Dame), pick-and-roll (Oregon), or 3 point-shooting (UConn), or by whatever it is we did last year? I'd say Baylor got the better of all of us because they had the defense and a stud shot blocker Lauren Cox. She won the game vs Oregon because she recovered to the weak side so well and blocked so many Ionescu lay-ups. And Baylor won the championship. Short of being able to stop Notre Dame, their defense carried them to wins over UConn and Oregon, and essentially was the foundation of their championship team. I'm still kind of caught a bit vague about your McCowan claims. It's like saying Shaq was limited because all he did was bulldoze people in the NBA for 25 points per game. It's not like he wasn't integral in winning games, and championships with the Lakers. And vise versa applies here. Geno wouldn't know what to do with William and he'd probably waste her, and he probably wouldn't value Vivians as much as Vic did because her shooting percentage at the beginning of her career would get her benched, without a chance to see playing time again for the rest of her career. It does not appear like most people think Geno is better at developing big girls than Vic, which probably means he wouldn't do as good with McCowan as Vic would. This goes both ways, bud. :confused: ... [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach

Forum statistics

Threads: 164,433

Messages: 4,396,167

Members: 10,209

Latest member: gemini*trvl