Thoughts about Ines as back up PG against Princeton

[CL82]

OK I will go into dangerous territory here, and I'm sure I will get plenty of disagreement, but by my definition Geno runs up the score all the time. In my opinion when the game is decided, the players that are out of the normal rotation should be in there, and generally with the reserves in the rotation, not the starters.

We can all disagree over at what margin the game is over, but there are many games where Uconn is ahead by 30-40 points and the third stringers don't come in until there is only a couple of minutes left. Could he have put them in much much sooner without jeopardizing the outcome of the game? Of course but he doesn't. IMO there are quite a few games where the starters could sit the entire 4th quarter.

It certainly appears that Geno would rather leave the starters in till very near the end and win by 40 instead of giving the bench more play much earlier and only win by 35 for example. I consider that to be running up the score.

Having said that, there are a number of reasons why a coach might do that. Some of the statistical rating services probably take the margin of victory into account and winning by 40 instead of 35 helps that rating. Some star players that you recruit may not want to sit much of the 4th quarter of a blowout, I do think Geno wants to develop chemistry between the core rotation, and continuing to play them after the outcome has been decided adds to their experience together, but of course that strategy has the downside of not developing the end of the bench for when they may be needed for a significant role due to injuries.

There are trade offs in many things including how playing time is administered, but if you look at the clock and the score, and the game is clearly over and your stars are still in the game, that is running up the score to me.

I would somewhat agree with you if this were grade school rec basketball game, but even then, not that much. What kids want to do is play penalizing them for excellence, which seem a counter incentive, no?

There are a whole lot of things that can be learned in a game setting that you may not appreciate. How do you different lineups work together? How well have players learned different sets? If you watch our games a lot, and I know you do, you probably realize that when there is a significant margin of victory, we tend to stop fast breaking and run half court sets. These are opportunities to teach and learn against Division I players who are different than the ones we practice against every day.

Now, I haven’t looked, but I have a sense that the number of times we are 30 or 40 points ahead and it isn’t the last couple of minutes of a game is probably less than you think. If you’re interested, go take a look.

I know you are a big fan, as am I, so we may just have to agree to disagree on this. Happy to talk about it more if you’d like to though.

 

[uconnfan68]

OK I will go into dangerous territory here, and I'm sure I will get plenty of disagreement, but by my definition Geno runs up the score all the time. In my opinion when the game is decided, the players that are out of the normal rotation should be in there, and generally with the reserves in the rotation, not the starters.

We can all disagree over at what margin the game is over, but there are many games where Uconn is ahead by 30-40 points and the third stringers don't come in until there is only a couple of minutes left. Could he have put them in much much sooner without jeopardizing the outcome of the game? Of course but he doesn't. IMO there are quite a few games where the starters could sit the entire 4th quarter.

It certainly appears that Geno would rather leave the starters in till very near the end and win by 40 instead of giving the bench more play much earlier and only win by 35 for example. I consider that to be running up the score.

Having said that, there are a number of reasons why a coach might do that. Some of the statistical rating services probably take the margin of victory into account and winning by 40 instead of 35 helps that rating. Some star players that you recruit may not want to sit much of the 4th quarter of a blowout, I do think Geno wants to develop chemistry between the core rotation, and continuing to play them after the outcome has been decided adds to their experience together, but of course that strategy has the downside of not developing the end of the bench for when they may be needed for a significant role due to injuries.

There are trade offs in many things including how playing time is administered, but if you look at the clock and the score, and the game is clearly over and your stars are still in the game, that is running up the score to me.

When the other team hasn’t conceded, and will begin full court pressing and trapping, why put your bench players out?

 

[oldhusky]

When the other team hasn’t conceded, and will begin full court pressing and trapping, why put your bench players out?

If the margin is big enough and the time short enough, it doesn't matter what the other team does regarding starters or strategy, you have concluded at that point that your bench can do enough to not blow a huge lead in a few minutes.

 

[HopJim]

When the other team hasn’t conceded, and will begin full court pressing and trapping, why put your bench players out?

The Princeton game was the perfect example of why you need to put the bench players in against the press. Our subs didn't seem to know how to break the trapping and took the easy way out, going to corners that made it easy to double and steal the ball.

 

[CL82]

If the margin is big enough and the time short enough, it doesn't matter what the other team does regarding starters or strategy, you have concluded at that point that your bench can do enough to not blow a huge lead in a few minutes.

Lol as we saw last night, a lot can happen in the last few minutes of a game. But your post above seems to contradict your original point. Your original point was that Gino shouldn’t wait until the last few minutes, but above you defend it by saying well it’s only the last few minutes. Those two things are inconsistent.

As @uconfan68, alluded to above, there is an etiquette to this. Typically the team that is down will pull it starters and put its subs in. At that point the team that is leading will do the same.

 

[CL82]

The Princeton game was the perfect example of why you need to put the bench players in against the press. Our subs didn't seem to know how to break the trapping and took the easy way out, going to corners that made it easy to double and steal the ball.

Or was it the perfect example of why you do not put in bench players against the press when they are not ready to handle it?

 

[Zarathustra]

Don’t do that. Don’t ever do that.

Sorry........ my error, not to be repeated! Go Nika, Gesundheit, Huskies!

Don’t do that. Don’t ever do that.

Quote the Raven: Nevermore!

 

[oldhusky]

Lol as we saw last night, a lot can happen in the last few minutes of a game. But your post above seems to contradict your original point. Your original point was that Gino shouldn’t wait until the last few minutes, but above you defend it by saying well it’s only the last few minutes. Those two things are inconsistent.

As @uconfan68, alluded to above, there is an etiquette to this. Typically the team that is down will pull it starters and put its subs in. At that point the team that is leading will do the same.

I wasn't trying to imply that Geno wait for the last few minutes. It is the margin vs. minutes left that I look at and the ratio between the two. If it is twice as much, say a 30 point lead with 15 minutes to go (halfway thru the third quarter) I think you could safely make the change then, or 20 point lead with 10 minutes to go. Maybe when you get down to a 10 point lead, I might want to wait a little longer than the 5 minute mark because a couple of turnovers and three pointers. and it is a game again.

I went back and looked at some games from the last championship season (2016). In that season the gap was probably about as wide as it could be between the rotation players who were great and two walk-ons in Lawlor and Pulido. That team averaged winning by 40 points a game, and as a result the starters only averaged around 30 instead of 35 or more.

So how much did our two third stringers play in some of the biggest blowouts? We beat Tulsa once by 64 points, Lawlor played 4 minutes, Pulido DNP. They played Tulsa again winning by 60 and Lawlor and Pulido got 3 minutes. They both got 3 minutes each against Cincinnati in a 62 point win. Three each against Mississippi State which amazingly we beat by 60, and so on.

In a 55 point blowout of UCF he went soft and gave Lawlor a whole 5 minutes, and Pulido 3 again. But he decided to rein in those minutes to only 1 apiece when the margin was only 31 against Syracuse. Clearly Geno has his reasons, and I have mentioned a few previously that might have merit, but he keeps his key players in the game way way way past the point where the game has been decided.

Then there is the injury argument. Let's not forget that Paige was injured last season in I think the last minute of a game where we were up by about 20. Was the outcome of that game in doubt? Anyway, the reluctance to use the end of the bench, when the game has long been over bothers me a lot, but I know many are not concerned at all with Geno's approach. Just one opinion.

 

[CL82]

. It is the margin vs. minutes left that I look at and the ratio between the two. If it is twice as much, say a 30 point lead with 15 minutes to go (halfway thru the third quarter) I think you could safely make the change then, or 20 point lead with 10 minutes to go. Maybe when you get down to a 10 point lead, I might want to wait a little longer than the 5 minute mark because a couple of turnovers and three pointers. and it is a game again.

So first, how often has Connecticut had a 30 point lead with 15 minutes to go this season that you believe this to be such a significant concern? A 20 point lead with 10 minutes to go and you’re going to clear the bench? That’s a recipe for a whole lot of losses. As we saw last night, the bench is not ready to play even against an ivy league opponent. Finally, you are sacrificing the development time for the top seven players. There is a reason why no coach that’s what you’re proposing.

Again, we can agree to disagree on it, but in my opinion, what you’re proposing would sacrifice both the record in the development of the team.

 

[HopJim]

Or was it the perfect example of why you do not put in bench players against the press when they are not ready to handle it?

Sometimes Geno doesn't have a choice. A sub with some experience, no matter what their skill level is, is usually better than one with none.

 

[tkaes]

As I read through this thread and it's discussion of the "bench", I was reminded of a quote from the movie Gettysburg from about 30 years ago. The South is getting hammered and Lee says to Pickett, "General you must look to your Division" Pickett responds, "General ... I have no Division". I keep thinking, "Coach you must look to your bench". Geno responds, "I have no bench".

Certainly not the most pleasant thought but right now unfortunately the reality.

 

[Longtime fan]

You saw what happens when Nika is hurt. It was the last few moments of chaos and turnovers, as we failed to defeat the Princeton pressure. Without Nika from the onset, we have no lead. And if we have to rest Lou, we have about 15 points. Maybe.

 

[Cuango]

OK I will go into dangerous territory here, and I'm sure I will get plenty of disagreement, but by my definition Geno runs up the score all the time. In my opinion when the game is decided, the players that are out of the normal rotation should be in there, and generally with the reserves in the rotation, not the starters.

We can all disagree over at what margin the game is over, but there are many games where Uconn is ahead by 30-40 points and the third stringers don't come in until there is only a couple of minutes left. Could he have put them in much much sooner without jeopardizing the outcome of the game? Of course but he doesn't. IMO there are quite a few games where the starters could sit the entire 4th quarter.

It certainly appears that Geno would rather leave the starters in till very near the end and win by 40 instead of giving the bench more play much earlier and only win by 35 for example. I consider that to be running up the score.

Having said that, there are a number of reasons why a coach might do that. Some of the statistical rating services probably take the margin of victory into account and winning by 40 instead of 35 helps that rating. Some star players that you recruit may not want to sit much of the 4th quarter of a blowout, I do think Geno wants to develop chemistry between the core rotation, and continuing to play them after the outcome has been decided adds to their experience together, but of course that strategy has the downside of not developing the end of the bench for when they may be needed for a significant role due to injuries.

There are trade offs in many things including how playing time is administered, but if you look at the clock and the score, and the game is clearly over and your stars are still in the game, that is running up the score to me.

You left out (imo) another reason why Geno doesn’t put the bench players in sooner. Geno has long been quoted as saying that playing time is earned in practice. I believe Amari’s lack of playing time (for example) is likely due to her effort in practice. Geno imo, does not want to reward poor practice habits/effort/performance! Now some may argue that is cutting off your nose…. , but I’m not so sure. He is playing the long game and may be reluctant to change that policy for the short term. He seems to have done all right so far and I am willing/happy to give him the benefit of the doubt. His and CD’s attention to the culture they have created here at UConn is one of the things (a very big part, imo) that has allowed this team to become the greatest Women’s Basketball Program in history! Changing core principles for short term success is fraught with danger!

 

[Inthepaint]

I think Geno has to balance some complicated factors.
Not in order of importance
1) Winning games
Unless he’s in cahoots with big time gamblers, the MOV probably doesn’t interest him
2) the physical health & condition of his players
3) the emotional health and morale of the players
Some freshmen can handle pressure and adversity
Some don’t learn how until they are juniors
4) giving everybody the opportunity to get real game experience which they will all need in order to develop the skills, knowledge and confidence to perform at the level expected by a top echelon program.
Paige spoiled us and set the bar at a ridiculous height for all freshmen who follow her.
Geno has shown that he will take the heat and second guessing for his decisions.
He has also shown a determination not to be pressured into taking a short term viewpoint in response to adverse circumstances.
He will NOT push players into situations that he believes would be detrimental to their development.
I guess it’s a pretty good system