Stewart...

[meyers7]

That's true of everyone who has never taken a particular shot in a game. The only evidence anyone has until that moment is performance in practice and near similar shots both of which are in Stef's favor.

Yes, and you said you've never seen her make one (or even take one).

That's like saying ...she gets up near the rim in warmups....she should dunk in a game.

No evidence.

In order to be taking 3 pt shots in a game (and be a threat - anyone can hoist up one), one should be taking and making lots of them in practice and warmups. Steph as far as you have said has done zero.

If you have some other evidence like....I've been to practice numerous times and she is knocking down 3's left and right.....then that would be something to base it on.

 

[meyers7]

That might be an excepetion, but I don't know if he told her not to, or she just didn't take them.

Always wondered about that too.

 

[Sonny44]

Breanna has so many skills from all over the court Geno will have to determine where she fits in best with the talent we already have.
I recommend he just tells her to go out there and do whatever she wants (tongue in cheek). Whatever, she will make him look like a genius.

 

[doggydaddy]

Breanna has so many skills from all over the court Geno will have to determine where she fits in best with the talent we already have.
I recommend he just tells her to go out there and do whatever she wants (tongue in cheek). Whatever, she will make him look like a genius.

The great thing about Stewart is she clearly is a terrific team player and doesn't need to dominate the ball. She is sometimes compared to Parker, but I think that is a big difference. Parker always needed to dominate the ball in college.

I think she will rotate at the 3/4 next year, grabbing some of the minutes left by Hayes departure and a few from Faris.

Every time I think of Stewart at the 4, I remember that they have Tuck coming in. Geno will be nuts finding minutes for everyone.

 

[meyers7]

The great thing about Stewart is she clearly is a terrific team player and doesn't need to dominate the ball. She is sometimes compared to Parker, but I think that is a big difference. Parker always needed to dominate the ball in college.

I think she will rotate at the 3/4 next year, grabbing some of the minutes left by Hayes departure and a few from Faris.

Every time I think of Stewart at the 4, I remember that they have Tuck coming in. Geno will be nuts finding minutes for everyone.

I think with Dolson, Stokes, Stewart and Tuck filling the 4/5 spots, Faris can move back to a more natural 3..... and not get beat up in the post all the time.

 

[Icebear]

Yes, and you said you've never seen her make one (or even take one).

That's like saying ...she gets up near the rim in warmups....she should dunk in a game.

No evidence.

In order to be taking 3 pt shots in a game (and be a threat - anyone can hoist up one), one should be taking and making lots of them in practice and warmups. Steph as far as you have said has done zero.

If you have some other evidence like....I've been to practice numerous times and she is knocking down 3's left and right.....then that would be something to base it on.

As I said the evidence is the excellent % she shoots within one step, sometimes one foot of the 3 pt line. That is not a lack of evidence. Many games she has shot over 50% on those which adjusting for minute of error she probably shoots 35% or so from three land. Stef is strong enough to not change her mechanics for that extra yard. She has the ability physically, one will never know about game conditions until it happens. Then we will have a sample of 1 until she takes a 2nd and ... I think it is worth the risk of discovery. It has been said by the players or Geno that she does make them in practice.

 

[meyers7]

As I said the evidence is the excellent % she shoots within one step, sometimes one foot of the 3 pt line. That is not a lack of evidence. Many games she has shot over 50% on those which adjusting for minute of error she probably shoots 35% or so from three land. Stef is strong enough to not change her mechanics for that extra yard. She has the ability physically, one will never know about game conditions until it happens. Then we will have a sample of 1 until she takes a 2nd and .

Not evidence she can make them, especially in games.

It has been said by the players or Geno that she does make them in practice.

Evidence that she might be able to make them in a game.

 

[Icebear]

Not evidence she can make them, especially in games.



Evidence that she might be able to make them in a game.

Of course, it is. Using your logic no one would ever take a shot in college since the is no proof they can make one in a college game.

 

[Sonny44]

Not evidence she can make them, especially in games.



Evidence that she might be able to make them in a game.

What's everbody thinking? We don't need her for that.

 

[meyers7]

What's everbody thinking? We don't need her for that.

I have no idea what they are thinking.

 

[Icebear]

What's everbody thinking? We don't need her for that.

It is not that we need Stef to make 3s it is because of what the threat of her making shots that far out can do to disrupt a defense. It is about back screening the Peters and Griners in the world to make back cuts. And to draw them off the boards, as well. It is just one more tool in the toolbox.

 

[doggydaddy]

It is not that we need Stef to make 3s it is because of what the threat of her making shots that far out can do to disrupt a defense. It is about back screening the Peters and Griners in the world to make back cuts. And to draw them off the boards, as well. It is just one more tool in the toolbox.

There is no threat of her shooting the 3. They will leave her out there to shoot it all day long. And Geno won't let her shoot any to create that threat.

She can create all the back screening for back cuts and draw them off the boards with her threat from 17 feet.

Now Stewart? That is a different story.

 

[Sonny44]

It is not that we need Stef to make 3s it is because of what the threat of her making shots that far out can do to disrupt a defense. It is about back screening the Peters and Griners in the world to make back cuts. And to draw them off the boards, as well. It is just one more tool in the toolbox.

Sorry, was I confused? I was talking about Breanna, not Steph.

 

[Icebear]

There is no threat of her shooting the 3. They will leave her out there to shoot it all day long. And Geno won't let her shoot any to create that threat.

She can create all the back screening for back cuts and draw them off the boards with her threat from 17 feet.

Now Stewart? That is a different story.

Farther the better. She is already making shots from 18-20 and the additional stride increases the reward by 50%.

 

[meyers7]

Of course, it is. Using your logic no one would ever take a shot in college since the is no proof they can make one in a college game.

No ice. No.

Look, you said "She is very capable of doing that" (stepping back and making three's). I asked why you would say that.

You responded "Because of the excellent % she shoots from one step inside the 3Pt line and having seen her shoot a couple in warm-ups". Which is not evidence she can shoot them at all let alone in a game situation.

Then you responded "The only evidence anyone has until that moment is performance in practice", which is true, but up til this point there was no evidence of. Had you said earlier that you had seen her or that it has been reported that she shoots them all the time in practice, then that would have been some evidence.

Then you said "As I said the evidence is the excellent % she shoots within one step, sometimes one foot of the 3 pt line" That is not evidence she can make them in a game. OR that she can make them at all. There's a big difference between inside the line and outside the line. If you don't understand that, you'll just have to trust me on it.

Then you said "It has been said by the players or Geno that she does make them in practice". Now there would be some evidence, at least to look at. And you should have said that in the beginning, not this ridiculous stuff about "similar" shots. Now that can be looked at. Is she just messing around, shooting some 3s for fun? Or is she actually shooting 3s in practice, while the team is running offense and it's part of the offense. Cause if she isn't doing that, then no she shouldn't be, in a game, stepping back and shooting some 3s (just because ice has seen her shoot "similar" shots in warmups). Seriously????

 

[01Neaggrad02]

How did this all turn into Stef shooting the threes instead of Breanna? I am confused.

 

[doggydaddy]

Farther the better. She is already making shots from 18-20 and the additional stride increases the reward by 50%.

It's not going to happen.

Her form is not one that promotes a good percentage from 3.

18-20 feet? I don't think so. She rarely takes a shot from more than 18 feet. That is 3 feet behind the foul line.

 

[Icebear]

No ice. No.

Look, you said "She is very capable of doing that" (stepping back and making three's). I asked why you would say that.

You responded "Because of the excellent % she shoots from one step inside the 3Pt line and having seen her shoot a couple in warm-ups". Which is not evidence she can shoot them at all let alone in a game situation.

Yes, it is evidence. There is no wall. Accuracy is all about performance and the standard measure is minute of deviation. This is the very reason archers shoot different size targets at different distances. In old standard FITA round one shot two different sizes at two distances for each. Adding 3 feet to an 18 foot shot is a change of 16% in minute of error. Or an approx. reduction of .84 times her shooting % on those shots all else be equal, meaning the general abilities, such as, strength to execute the shot. At 50% that means a reduction to 42%, at 40% that means 33.6%. Both are reasonably worth taking the shot.

Then you responded "The only evidence anyone has until that moment is performance in practice", which is true, but up til this point there was no evidence of. Had you said earlier that you had seen her or that it has been reported that she shoots them all the time in practice, then that would have been some evidence.

Actually, a Boneyarder had noted Stef regularly taking and making them in practice earlier in the year. This is in addition to watching in warm ups and the comments of her teammates or Geno.

Then you said "As I said the evidence is the excellent % she shoots within one step, sometimes one foot of the 3 pt line" That is not evidence she can make them in a game. OR that she can make them at all. There's a big difference between inside the line and outside the line. If you don't understand that, you'll just have to trust me on it.

There is little difference except as the mathematics shows and minute of error indicates. Like all things execute the shot as rehearsed. It should be practiced and rehearsed. Having played my share of basketball I do not need to trust you but rather trust my experience.


Then you said "It has been said by the players or Geno that she does make them in practice". Now there would be some evidence, at least to look at. And you should have said that in the beginning, not this ridiculous stuff about "similar" shots. Now that can be looked at. Is she just messing around, shooting some 3s for fun? Or is she actually shooting 3s in practice, while the team is running offense and it's part of the offense. Cause if she isn't doing that, then no she shouldn't be, in a game, stepping back and shooting some 3s (just because ice has seen her shoot "similar" shots in warmups). Seriously????

See the comment about practice and rehearsal. And as I said by your logic no one would ever attemt a shot in a game because they have never done it before.

If you want to continue let us take it off board.

 

[doggydaddy]

Steph does NOT shoot an excellent percent from 1 step inside the 3 point line. I haven't seen the numbers, but I would be SHOCKED if it was much better than 30 percent.

Take a step back and it's more like 20.

I'd be happy if she could improve on the outside shots she takes before even thinking about shooting 3's.

 

[Icebear]

Against St. John's she was hit at least four from the foul line and out to 18, she only missed two shots all night one of which I believe was an attempted put back. So the worst she was for the evening was 4 for 5, 80%. Against Rutgers she was 2 for 4 one of which was an at the buzzer forced 3, 50%. Last night she was 0-4 (Kaleena has had a couple of those and worse this year, it happens). That is 6-13 or 46.2% for the Big East tournament. She is an 82.5% foul shooter this year and 81.6% last year. I think it is worth the possibilities.

The top pf the key is 19 feet to the front of the rim. She shoots regularly from 17-19. One three foot stride is 20-22 spanning the 3 point line.

 

[John Fryer]

I am, like most BYs, thrilled at the prospects of yet another NPOY attending UConn.

But I am surprised that so much praise and high anticipations have been placed on the arrival of Breanna.

I certainly hope that she is able to come in and make meaningful contributions to making UConn a much better and stronger team.

But she will be a freshmen, right?

Then there are the changes in the level and quality of the competition that confronts all freshmen.

And what about the returning players who have already demonstrated that they are contributors? (Think Bria, Kelly, Stef, Caroline, Kiah and KML.)

There is also the question/problem of what is to be done about PT for Caroline and Kelly?

And she arrives along side two other outstanding freshmen in Moriah and Morgan.

Can we can assume that Kiah will continue to develop, and that Brianna might be at a whole different level next season?

Then the question of PT, as pointed out by other posters, could go beyond being a question to being a problem.

Unlike some posters, I don't assume that Breanna is a better 4 than Morgan.

Similarly, I don't assume that Breanna would be a better 3 than KML.

I do assume that Bria will be the starting 2. No matter what happens at the other positions.

I just can't see Moriah on the bench and Caroline starting in front of her. (Unless, of course, Caroline conditioning really improves over the summer. Which I hope it does.)

All of this is, of course, just my opinion.

Peace,

John Fryer

 

[doggydaddy]

Against St. John's she was hit at least four from the foul line and out to 18, she only missed two shots all night one of which I believe was an attempted put back. So the worst she was for the evening was 4 for 5, 80%. Against Rutgers she was 2 for 4 one of which was an at the buzzer forced 3, 50%. Last night she was 0-4 (Kaleena has had a couple of those and worse this year, it happens). That is 6-13 or 46.2% for the Big East tournament. She is an 82.5% foul shooter this year and 81.6% last year. I think it is worth the possibilities.

Against St. Johns:

First half
14:14 - missed foul line jumper (15 feet)
8:16 - hit turn around jumper in lane (8 feet)
4:08 - hit jumper from 1 foot behind foul line (16 feet)
2:49 - missed foul line jumper (15 feet)

Second half
9:36 - hit jumper from 1 foot behind foul line (16 feet)

That was it for outside shots. 3-5. One from 8 feet, so from the foul line and beyond, she was 2-4.

And those were 15-16 feet. None beyond that. Certainly not 18-20 feet.

She is not a great shoot much beyond 16 feet. Never has been. And with the makeup of the team going forward, she will never have to be. I think we saw her one 3 point shot.

 

[doggydaddy]

Ice, just checked the RU game tape too.

First half
18:17 - Missed jumper (17 feet)
13:36 - Missed jumper (16 feet)

Second half
15:01 - Missed jumper (3 pointer to beat the shot clock)
13:17 - Missed jumper (17 feet)

That's it. 0-4, not 2-4. And add in the 3-5 from the SJU game and the 0-4 last night you get 3-13.

That's 23%. Probably right around where she is for the season. Maybe even less. And only one more than 17 feet.

 

[Icebear]

Well, sorry then because that's not my memory which usually is pretty good on these things. I'll rewatch them and apologize.

 

[doggydaddy]

Well, sorry then because that's not my memory which usually is pretty good on these things. I'll rewatch them and apologize.

You need to rewatch? You don't believe me?

 

[Icebear]

You need to rewatch? You don't believe me?

No, I don't believe my recollection is that far off, usually, it serves me much better than that and I've already watched each game 3 times.

I never believe you. Just teasing.

 

[doggydaddy]

No, I don't believe my recollection is that far off, usually, it serves me much better than that and I've already watched each game 3 times.

I never believe you. Just teasing.

Well, you will see my numbers are correct. 23% on those shots does not give me comfort that Steph can hit a reasonable percentage of 3's. Or even 15-17 foot shots.

You really think think this is a good strategy? You really haven't convinced me yet.

 

[Icebear]

Well, you will see my numbers are correct. 23% on those shots does not give me comfort that Steph can hit a reasonable percentage of 3's. Or even 15-17 foot shots.

You really think this is a good strategy? You really haven't convinced me yet.

Yes, I do think it is a good strategy. Whether it can be executed is a different question. It particularly has potential against a team like Baylor.

I wasn't really trying to convince you or even address you. You ended up in the midst of the discussion meyers and I were having but that was cool. That's why I suggested taking it off board. As I said I don't mind apologizing to you. I just have a very clear vision of what I am remembering and I am now trying to put it in place. I'm glad and appreciate you took the time to tie down the facts I had reconstructed mine from the box scores and memory. I still disagree with meyers points but disagreement isn't the end of the world. It is simply non-functional to say that you should not do something until you prove you can do it in a game. Doing it in practice as reported for Stef by some it at least a starting point to risk doing it in a game. Stef almost let one fly from on the 3pt line last night but decided against it.

When I said I never believe you I assumed you knew I was kidding thus the . I think I have disagreed with few things you have said.

 

[meyers7]

If you want to continue let us take it off board.

No point. I've explained as clear as I possibly can. You're not gonna get it. Sorry.

 

[meyers7]

I am, like most BYs, thrilled at the prospects of yet another NPOY attending UConn.

But I am surprised that so much praise and high anticipations have been placed on the arrival of Breanna.

Remember when Maya and DT came in as freshmen? By all accounts she is on that level. Hence the high anticipation.