Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="jazz, post: 4273825, member: 10942"] I watched the game a second time and want to give some props to deacon for his observations, but those observations also come with a [B]HUGE[/B] caveat. In addition, a second observation made by Deacon is just[B] flat wrong[/B]. NM’s playing time and point differential: In at 4:39 in Q1 with score at 4-2. Stanford at the line and makes one, score at 4-3 and this is when I count +/- points with NM in the game. For me the FT does not count as time NM was in the game since it was earned when she was not in the game and the clock was not moving when scored. NM out of the game at 9:20 in Q2. Score 12-9. Uconn plus 2 with NM in the game. NM in the game at 1:01 of Q2 score 25-26 Stanford. NM [B]scores our only points[/B] before half to give us a 27-26 lead. Total uconn plus 4 when NM was in the game. NM in the game at 4:15 of Q3, score was 34-31 Uconn. NM stays in until 3:13 in Q4, score 49-42 Uconn. WE had some of our best scoring during these 11 minutes that NM was in the game. Total Uconn up 6 pts with NM in the game. The part I missed was the 11 seconds NM was in the game from 1:26 to 1:15 left in Q4. In these 11 seconds, EW gave up an easy layup to Jones, then was involved in the out of bounds TO that gave the ball back to Stanford, then gave up position to Jones for the foul and another 2 points which brought NM’s +/- down to 2 points. So, I stand corrected and I do apologise. But if not for the abysmal play by EW in those 11 seconds, uconn would be +/- 6 points or more when NM was in the game. Keep in mind it is also a disadvantage from a point differential point of view to be put in the game when the other team has the ball! Too bad GA didn’t substitute NM in for EW for those 11 minutes because surely they could not be any worse. I wrote my thoughts on EW’s play at the end of the game in my original post, but decided to delete most of it in the spirit of the big win. I originally said that in the last 2 minutes or so, EW was part of 3 TOs, gave up four easy points and in general there are times she is just a bit too nonchalant for my taste. I've said this before during th season, EW is plagued at times, by what I call WTF moments. However, as I stated before, she did hit some big shots for us and had 6 rebounds. Now it is true NM didn’t have any assists, which I left out of my original post. She should have had one with a nice pass into EW but she fumbled the pass and didnt get off an easy layup. I also left out her steal and 2 TOs, both of which came when she scrapped/hustled for rebounds against bigger players – I can’t see penalising her for that. For full disclosure, she had 2 fouls. Now Deacon, you also said that there were '[B]numerous instances in which players went by her. That they shot badly shouldn't be to Nika's credit.[/B]' This is just [B]flat wrong[/B] and cannot be a simple oversight on your part. [B]Why would you say something so blantantly false??[/B] NM was beat 3 times, giving up a total of 4 points…I originally thought it was only 2 points. She was helped by ONO on the one miss although NM had recovered to some degree to also harass the shooter. The other two were made shots. So where does the '[B]they shot badly shouldn't be to Nika's credit[/B]' comment coming from?? Where is the '[B]numerous instances[/B]' coming from? EW on the other hand was beat over half a dozen times and even PB got beat several times. Getting beat three times for 4 points does not equate to ‘[B]numerous[/B]’ but instead equates to an excellent defensive performance as you would expect from the BE defensive player of the year. There is the reason why NM was substituted in for defensive purposes at the end of the game. GA just subbed out the wrong player! [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach

Forum statistics

Threads: 164,410

Messages: 4,395,002

Members: 10,208

Latest member: jskwrite