Thoughts about the ND game

[hoophuskee]

1--- UCONN won the game. They were the better team. UCONN won the game. UCONN won the game.
2--- ND had a lot of success playing small ball. SO how again are ND's two posts supposed to help that? They're game plan was to spread the floor and shoot bombs away. How do two posts playing together help that?
3--- ND hast shot miserably vs UCONN for 3 straight years. FOUR games. They got hot this time.
4--- ND shot super and still the game entering the 4th quarter was over. Never in doubt.
5-- Did I hear right, someone said UCONN and ND are even? Are you kidding me? They shot 65% from 3 and still lost by 10.
6--- We'll see if these teams like ND and DePaul can continue to shoot bombs away vs us the next time we meet them IF we meet them - in March. It's a long season. I doubt those legs will be the same the next time we play.
7--- I'll reiterate, UCONN was up by 16 AT HOME at end of 3rd quarter. And even to start the 4th it ballooned to 20. Did any of you really think we were gong to lose? The game was OVER.

 

[hjoerring]

I've been holding off reaching conclusions about this team until now. ND provided a real test, much more of one than I would have expected, given than they were missing two of their best players. If even one of their bigs had been in this game, I fear for what the result might have been.

Other thoughts:
1. Were the UConn players just letting ND's guards jack up threes, or was it that they simply could not guard the Mabry sisters? Maybe after about 3 or 4, someone could have suggested that a UConn player stay in the freshman's face?
2. Morgan Tuck is a fine player, and IMHO we cna expect her to get her 10 to 14 points a game. That said, UCOnn's strategy cannot just be to toss it in to Stewie and let her do her magic. Even though she will be magical many nights, that just is not a successful way to win against the really good teams, even in a year when UCOnn is measurably better than all of them.
3. The more I think about it, the less I think of UConn's opening defensive strategy. I mean, they knew ND was going to have to play small ball and they knew ND had some quality gunners. And IMHO, it seemed to take forever and a day for them to really guard Mabry.
4. Looks like there are some teams that Gabby won't match up well against, or else some nights when she just cannot get it done.
5. The freshmen are freshmen. KLS had her moments, and those threes are going to drop more regularly at some point, but she's not terrific yet. Napheesa seems like a good kid and I hope she gets her game together, but it is certainly not there yet.
6. Leave it to ND to play out of their minds in a game like this. They weren't going to win with the personnel they had, but they came very close with unbelievable shooting and hard work.

If you are right about most of your analysis then: 1) it was the coaching plan; 2) the implied logic- if they/ND had their bigs ... it would be a different game. Of course it would be. Perhaps they would have won. Perhaps we would have won anyway, even by 30. We don't know, do we. Yes, the Marbry freshman should either force us to rethink our noise about ours, is far ahead in her development, or simply had her game of fame. Personally, I think it's becoming too much the Stewie show, and the others have put (or find) themselves in a difficult space. But 10points is far from almost losing a game. And ND is a mirror of us, so they are not going to get blown out of a game. Others will step up. Nor am I of the opinion that our coaches had a game plan to blow ND out of the water, given that their main pieces were missing.

 

[Biff]

The persistent hubristic boast that "This UConn team is the greatest wcbb program ever" certainly deserves to be shelved for now. Skip the ceremony.

AHEM if I may....I know you have expressed your "displeasure" with posters utilizing the word "program" where you feel team should be used. If you really feel that your bold words above are a proper use of the words then I see why we disagree on your displeasure.

I have never used the word program to equate to a team. A team is part of a program. A program is a team an all the many other parts that make it tick. Coaches, trainers, administration, organization, infrastructure etc. A program also has a dimension of time covering many different teams.

A team can be the greatest team within a program, but a specific team can never be a greatest program. Those word used that way make absolutely no sense to me.

 

[huskeynut]

WOW - to listen to some of this it sounds as if we have a terrible team that was lucky to win at all!

I guess some have not been paying attention for the first few games of the season. Here's the pattern so far:
1. UCONN usually takes most of the first quarter to understand their opponent - ends the quarter with the lead
2. The lead increases during the second quarter.
3. The third quarter is the knock out punch - usually
4. The fourth quarter the lead continues to grow.

Now two teams out of seven, DePaul and ND, both ranked, have disturbed this a little. And why did these two disturb it - 3 point shooting above their average. Sounds similar to Dayton last year. And these two teams went with an untraditional 4 guard line up and used defensive pressure on our guards.

Are we doomed??????? No. We will be fine. And let's give some credit to Doug and Muffit. These are two very good and experienced coaches who know Geno and how he coaches. If anyone thought ND was going to roll over because Turner and Reimer were not playing, I can't help you. ND has a culture of winning just as we do. They have pride in their game and beleive they can beat anyone, anytime, any place.

We hear the complaints of blowout games at the time. We're in a lousy conference, we have no competition. Now we get to really competitive games in a row and chicken little is running around crying the sky is falling. Can't have it both ways people.

 

[Kibitzer]

AHEM if I may....I know you have expressed your "displeasure" with posters utilizing the word "program" where you feel team should be used. If you really feel that your bold words above are a proper use of the words then I see why we disagree on your displeasure.

I have never used the word program to equate to a team. A team is part of a program. A program is a team an all the many other parts that make it tick. Coaches, trainers, administration, organization, infrastructure etc. A program also has a dimension of time covering many different teams.

A team can be the greatest team within a program, but a specific team can never be a greatest program. Those word used that way make absolutely no sense to me.

I concede the point.

I was simply trying to avoid using the word "team" twice so I carelessly -- and obviously mistakenly -- used "program" instead. Mea culpa indeed!

Thanks for the guidance (and it's nice to know that someone actually reads my occasional drivel).

 

[HuskyNan]

Maybe he should stop making commercials and work on his coaching.

Guys, this is sounding really VolNation-like. Maybe everyone should take a deep breath...

1. Ms. Mabrey the Younger - In the same way that other teams leave one particular Husky open, have "picked their poison" as Doris likes to say, Geno probably thought he'd cover the known quantities and make a freshman beat them. Well, the kid stepped up, and kudos to her, but if I had to choose someone to guard loosely, I'd probably pick the youngest player in the starting lineup, too.
2. Kia - Anyone ever hear of the sophomore slump? Last year, some unknown came down from Canada and surprised opponents. Besides, back then opponents were worried about Mo and KML, not the freshman (ahem). This year, Kia is a known quantity and opponents are actually targeting her for a lot of attention. Ditto the Energizer Bunny, Gabby. Kia gets more attention because, as a guard, she has the ball in her hands a lot more but also, forwards on the other teams are worried about the kid with the steely gaze and 7'2" wing span.
3. ND shot 65% from the arc. A team shooting, say, 40-45% is considered to be a really good three point shooting team. Again, much credit goes to the Irish for making those shots but, c'mon, it's unrealistic to think that teams are going to do that with any regularity.
4. Geno outcoached the last two games - LOL. Anyone notice a difference between the first and second half of each game? Geno may be the best at in-game adjustments in WBB. How many points did Marina Mabrey have in the second half? 2.
5. Defense - As fans of other teams like to point out, it's still early. Last night was UConn's 6th game and Geno has been giving Lou and Napheesa a lot of playing time. I'm actually pretty impressed with Napheesa's D most games but last night, well, she was a bit over her head. I feel badly for her in the short term but know, because Geno LOOKS for players like this - she's going to be pissed at her D last night and will double her efforts in practice. I predict that kid will have some great games in a UConn uni.
6. ND is good - They're ranked #3, for a reason. And btw (this is in response to stuff I saw in other threads), ND does have a national championship. Also, Skylar Diggins and Jewel Loyd didn't play last night - stop calling Skylar names and taking potshots at both players. You might want to rethink all the "cute" names a few folks have been calling Muffet McGraw, too. It's immature and embarrassing.
7. (added this one on edit) DePaul and ND - if there are two coaches that know Geno and know how his teams play, it's Doug Bruno and Muffet McGraw. The teams have only played each other a thousand times. These three good coaches were going at it with guns blazing and the results were entertaining and energetic basketball games - and one more painful reminder that the Big East was the best women's basketball league ever.

 

[huskeynut]

Guys, this is sounding really VolNation-like. Maybe everyone should take a deep breath...

1. Ms. Mabrey the Younger - In the same way that other teams leave someone open, have "picked their poison" as Doris likes to say, Geno probably thought he'd cover the known quantities and make a freshman beat them. Well, the kid stepped up, and kudos to her, but if I had to choose someone to guard loosely, I'd probably pick the youngest player in the starting lineup, too.
2. Kia - Anyone ever hear of the sophomore slump? Last year, some unknown came down from Canada and surprised opponents. Besides, back then opponents were worried about Mo and KML, not the freshman (ahem). This year, Kia is a known quantity and opponents are actually targeting her for a lot of attention. Ditto the Energizer Bunny, Gabby. Kia gets more attention because, as a guard, she has the ball in her hands a lot more but also, forwards on the other teams are worried about the kid with the steely gaze and 7'2" wing span.
3. ND shot 65% from the arc. A team shooting, say, 40-45% is considered to be a really good three point shooting team. Again, much credit goes to the Irish for making those shots but, c'mon, it's unrealistic to think that teams are going to do that with any regularity.
4. Geno outcoached the last two games - LOL. Anyone notice a difference between the first and second half of each game? Geno may be the best at in-game adjustments in WBB. How many points did Marina Mabrey have in the second half? 2.
5. Defense - As fans of other teams like to point out, it's still early. Last night was UConn's 6th game and Geno has been giving Lou and Napheesa a lot of playing time. I'm actually pretty impressed with Napheesa's D most games but last night, well, she was a bit over her head. I feel badly for her in the short term but know, because Geno LOOKS for players like this - she's going to be pissed at her D last night and will double her efforts in practice. I predict that kid will have some great games in a UConn uni.
6. ND is good - They're ranked #3, for a reason. And btw (this is in response to stuff I saw in other threads), ND does have a national championship. Also, Skylar Diggins and Jewel Loyd didn't play last night - stop calling Skylar names and taking potshots at both players. You might want to rethink all the "cute" names a few folks have been calling Muffet McGraw, too. It's immature and embarrassing.

Kudos Nan. You hit the nail on the head!!!!!!

I was going to say all this chatter (being nice) sounds like our football board - Arm chair QB's who know more than the coach. VolNation is a better comparison.

 

[Kibitzer]

Nan, one minor point. Marina Mabrey (the "Younger") was not even in the ND starting lineup. All the more reason for everyone in the arena (including Geno, Muffet and, yes, probably Marina herself) to be taken aback by such an astonishing first half production (21 points) after coming off the bench!

Maybe Muffet started the wrong Mabrey.

 

[Geno-ista]

I thought Geno was out coached for the second game in a row. Other than the switch to put Mo on Mabrey , I saw very few adjustments .....mostly the same old offense. ND kept it close by not only making threes but by moving on offense while our girls were less active. If it were not for Stewie and her all court game, it could have been embarrassing for us.

If the "same old offense" equal 90 pts per game!!!! I'm ok w a ho hum performance Locke that. I was taken back a bit by De Paul & Notre Dame and how competitive they both were. But before I totally chop up oour team and our coaching, I'm going to give our worthy competitors props!

 

[Geno-ista]

Maybe he should stop making commercials and work on his coaching.

Are you serious with these comments?

 

[Geno-ista]

This I don't understand. Was it just Geno being stubborn? Once Mabrey2 had 15 points in what seemed like 5 minutes of play, I put my bestest defender on her. And that happens to be Mo. Why wait until after the half to make adjustments? This seems to happen in football as well and I could never understand that strategy. If you see something, say something, er fix something.

I can't remember how many fouls Mo had, but the way they were calling them, my biggest fear was, and maybe his too was keeping our big three out of foul trouble? Before going to that higher octane pressure defense?

 

[Gabbyfan]

Ok, ok, maybe I was a little harsh, because winning is everything....right? When I made my very first post on the boneyard a few months ago, l felt that team chemistry was Geno's biggest challenge. This team is loaded to the gills with talent and deserves to be referred to as perhaps the best ever team in WBB. However, I think Geno is still struggling with this chemistry thing....yes they have won all their games and have demolished most of their opponents, but Geno's substitution pattern seems to reflect a search for the right combination of players for the various game situations he faces. It is still early in the season, so we should give him some time. Just remember this chemistry issue is going to get even more complicated when Natalie comes into the picture. Natalie's presence in the lineup should alter the offensive schemes as well. So let's wait to see what happens there.
I give Muffet credit for her team's performance . Just think what it would be like if Mo had left last year for the WNBA and both Stewie and Morgan could not play due to injuries.

 

[Geno-ista]

Unless ND is allowed to have 6/7 players on the court at the same time, the more likely outcome of Turner playing would be that many of the shot attempts from 3pt (at a 75% clip) would be 2pt attempts (say at a 50% clip). The result being, fewer points by ND. On defense, Turner would have made a difference, so fewer points for UConn. So overall, a push.

Credit to ND and the Mabry's for playing so well today. However, there is no way they can repeat their 3pt shooting again against UConn, and there is no way that freshmen Mabry is better than freshmen KLS or freshmen NC. And yes, UConn's second team will be forced to play ND next year (or whenever they are scheduled to play) and UConn will win that game as well.

I'm not so sure we win this game if a totally healthy Turner is in the paint. And next yr, will be drastically different without our big three- especially our two superstars. And especially when you take Stewie off the court- end of story.

 

[Kibitzer]

Maybe he should stop making commercials and work on his coaching.

Strongly disagree. Geno's most recent commercial (the one about "NC rings") was a resounding success as measured by all the plaudits, kudos and props expressed by Boneyard viewers.

On the other hand, Geno's coaching has been criticized, often harshly, by resident geniuses and wise asses like you.

Geno, go back to doing commercials before it's too late!

 

[DriveLH]

ND had one of the strangest stat lines I've ever seen: 3's 13 of 20 65%, FT's 6 of 10 60%, 2's 10 of 43 41.8% . Overall 31 of 63 49.2%. How do you shoot better on 3's than free throws??

 

[Geno-ista]

Happy with the win despite ND scrappy play and hot shooting. I just wish Geno left collier in there a little longer, I think Collier is THE frosh to watch, KLS will be good as time goes by but I'm not going to hold my breath on her three to win the game.

She looked a little overwhelmed by the game last night. If they thought keeping her in would help the team - they would have. KLS seams to be handling the pressure moments better right now- that's why we're seeing more of her.

 

[Geno-ista]

ND had one of the strangest stat lines I've ever seen: 3's 13 of 20 65%, FT's 6 of 10 60%, 2's 10 of 43 41.8% . Overall 31 of 63 49.2%. How do you shoot better on 3's than free throws??

By scoring a higher % on the 3 pt shots!

 

[Icebear]

ND had one of the strangest stat lines I've ever seen: 3's 13 of 20 65%, FT's 6 of 10 60%, 2's 10 of 43 41.8% . Overall 31 of 63 49.2%. How do you shoot better on 3's than free throws??

Exactly, if that is not proof that it was an aberrant game then I do not know what is.

 

[Geno-ista]

If KLS is going to be great, she has to emulate Stewie. That means rebounding, posting up, blocking shots, and doing all those other things Stewie does besides drain 3s like it's her job. KLS is still in that mindset of being the best player on the court and not having to "get dirty." Stewie learned and so shall KLS if she wants to make a mark on this vaunted WCBB program.

Hoops fan- I used to look forward to most of your posts and insights. I think you've lost a step or two. KLS looks like she gets our system more after 5 games than Stewie did after 5 games her freshmen year. I think a lot of our posters are losing it.
KLS was instrumental in closing out DePaul away, the last 8 minutes of the game in a pressure cooker.

 

[Geno-ista]

Ok, ok, maybe I was a little harsh, because winning is everything....right? When I made my very first post on the boneyard a few months ago, l felt that team chemistry was Geno's biggest challenge. This team is loaded to the gills with talent and deserves to be referred to as perhaps the best ever team in WBB. However, I think Geno is still struggling with this chemistry thing....yes they have won all their games and have demolished most of their opponents, but Geno's substitution pattern seems to reflect a search for the right combination of players for the various game situations he faces. It is still early in the season, so we should give him some time. Just remember this chemistry issue is going to get even more complicated when Natalie comes into the picture. Natalie's presence in the lineup should alter the offensive schemes as well. So let's wait to see what happens there.
I give Muffet credit for her team's performance . Just think what it would be like if Mo had left last year for the WNBA and both Stewie and Morgan could not play due to injuries.

Chemistry- I've watched almost every game 3-5 times for more years than I want to admit. Their flow on the court, 8 deep, has never looked better than right now- this early in the season. I've seen it 5 and sometimes 6 deep during some of the Maya and Renee years, but we're scoring 80-90 vs top ten teams. I think we should shut off our computers and the BY for 30 minutes, breathe deeply and take a walk and reflect on how lucky we are. Have a great day!!! ND played great and shot lights out- like DePaul did! Going to make sure the sky is still up there!

 

[Intpseeker]

Geno should have drawn up a game plan calling for 65% accuracy on three-point field goal attempts - just as Muffet did.

You hit the nail on the head, once again, Kib (may I call you Kib?). You have exposed the woefully ignorant coaching strategies on display in all of basketball. Why don't these overpaid morons just let their players shoot 70% from beyond the 3-point line?

 

[HuskyNan]

Hoops fan- I used to look forward to most of your posts and insights. I think you've lost a step or two. KLS looks like she gets our system more after 5 games than Stewie did after 5 games her freshmen year. I think a lot of our posters are losing it.
KLS was instrumental in closing out DePaul away, the last 8 minutes of the game in a pressure cooker.

I think a lot of people have forgotten how rocky Stewie's freshman year was. She had a prolonged slump and shied away from contact. She has come miles since then.

 

[Zorro]

1) Nan; That was an excellent post, both logical and passionate. I know it was passionate, because you said "badly" when I know you meant to say "bad". Easy mistake to slip into when you are writing with passion,.
2) 10/43 is actually 23%, not 41.8 %. Makes the anomaly even stronger.
3) Since I can't get the games on tv down here, the best I can do is follow along on Gametracker and the game thread on the BY. However, in order to do the latter, I have to block the posts of several posters, lest I lose my cool and post a diatribe telling them once again that it is aggravating to have to read every time player x makes a mistake how they have always had doubts about her abilities, how she is just to slow of foot to fit into the UConn scheme, how she is going to have to work harder to realize her potential, how Geno is going to have to change the way he uses her, if he uses her at all, ad infinitum and ad nauseum. Why the posters in question feel obliged to share this sort of wisdom with the rest of us I am not sure, but I think it has a helluva lot more to do with the posters than with the players criticized. Damned if I see any use in it, even if they were mostly correct, which, in my humble opinion, they mostly aren't. They seem to me to serve only to aggravate, and I am sure I am not the only one aggravated. I mention no names because 1) it is against board policy and I have been asked politely by the mods in the past to not do it and and so I politely comply and, 2) it really isn't necessary since everybody who follows the game threads knows to whom I am referring. I find that by using the ignore button for them I really don't miss a thing except self-applauding, aggravating, natteringly negative drivel. A fine thing, the ignore button.

 

[Kibitzer]

You hit the nail on the head, once again, Kib (may I call you Kib?). You have exposed the woefully ignorant coaching strategies on display in all of basketball. Why don't these overpaid morons just let their players shoot 70% from beyond the 3-point line?

Thanks -- and now let's consider what DePaul and Notre Dame players and fans must be thinking. Maybe something like this:

"Sheesh! What do we have to do to beat them? We played our best A+ game and shot the lights out from the perimeter and yet we still lost!"​

Add another "Sheesh or two.

 

[huskeynut]

Thanks -- and now let's consider what DePaul and Notre Dame players and fans must be thinking. Maybe something like this:

"Sheesh! What do we have to do to beat them? We played our best A+ game and shot the lights out from the perimeter and yet we still lost!"​

Add another "Sheesh or two.

BINGO!

 

[DriveLH]

1) Nan; That was an excellent post, both logical and passionate. I know it was passionate, because you said "badly" when I know you meant to say "bad". Easy mistake to slip into when you are writing with passion,.
2) 10/43 is actually 23%, not 41.8 %. Makes the anomaly even stronger.
3) Since I can't get the games on tv down here, the best I can do is follow along on Gametracker and the game thread on the BY. However, in order to do the latter, I have to block the posts of several posters, lest I lose my cool and post a diatribe telling them once again that it is aggravating to have to read every time player x makes a mistake how they have always had doubts about her abilities, how she is just to slow of foot to fit into the UConn scheme, how she is going to have to work harder to realize her potential, how Geno is going to have to change the way he uses her, if he uses her at all, ad infinitum and ad nauseum. Why the posters in question feel obliged to share this sort of wisdom with the rest of us I am not sure, but I think it has a helluva lot more to do with the posters than with the players criticized. Damned if I see any use in it, even if they were mostly correct, which, in my humble opinion, they mostly aren't. They seem to me to serve only to aggravate, and I am sure I am not the only one aggravated. I mention no names because 1) it is against board policy and I have been asked politely by the mods in the past to not do it and and so I politely comply and, 2) it really isn't necessary since everybody who follows the game threads knows to whom I am referring. I find that by using the ignore button for them I really don't miss a thing except self-applauding, aggravating, natteringly negative drivel. A fine thing, the ignore button.

Z, 31 of 63 overall, 18 of 20 3's , 31 - 13 = 18, 63 - 20 = 43, 18 of 43 = 41.8%

 

[Zorro]

Z, 31 of 63 overall, 18 of 20 3's , 31 - 13 = 18, 63 - 20 = 43, 18 of 43 = 41.8%

OK. I used the figures in your original post; did not go back and check to see if 10/43 was correct as I should have. (I thought 10/42 looked a little bizarre.) You must have hit the 0 when you intended to hit the 8. Nevertheless, we are agreed that the numbers are anomalous, no? And your original conclusion is certainly correct.

 

[calpedaler]

Thanks -- and now let's consider what DePaul and Notre Dame players and fans must be thinking. Maybe something like this:

"Sheesh! What do we have to do to beat them? We played our best A+ game and shot the lights out from the perimeter and yet we still lost!"​

Add another "Sheesh or two.

Still lost by double figures.

 

[Huskies Rule]

Geno has often said that "if we play our A game, nobody is going to beat us." And we know that he identifies what he believes to be his best starting five, and then he stays with that lineup, barring injury, pretty much through to the tournament. Against DePaul, nobody could have foreseen coach Bruno's unique 5 in/5 out strategy, and the tightness of the game, as I saw it, wasn't a matchup issue but rather one of fatigue and pressure and an opponent's unexpected game plan.

But against ND, I felt it was all about matchups. Geno (and the rest of the free world) knew that Turner would be out and Reimer would be very limited. ND had no choice but to go small, with 4 guards and even a smallish big in Westbeld. They absolutely weren't going to attack in the paint. Geno surely knew their game plan would be to attack from the outside, as DePaul did successfully. And like DePaul, ND shot lights out from the arc, in large part because our perimeter defense was pretty lousy. As were the unfavorable matchups.

So my question - Why must the starting lineup be written in stone? Can't it be tweaked just a bit every once in a while without harming team chemistry or in order to create more favorable matchups for us? I think it can. Even though Morgan had very good numbers against both DePaul and ND, the pace of both games was clearly not to her liking. I suspect that contributed to the unusually high number of 'easy' shots she missed and turnovers she committed. She was exhausted, and she gave up too many points on the other end to quicker, fresher players. Gabby, too. The last two games have been played at a speed neither player seemed too comfortable with. And that caused problems which might have been foreseen and addressed before the tipoff by making adjustments to the starting lineup. Or shortly after ND's rather predictable strategy unfolded. For just one game, would it hurt? Might it help?

You can't argue with Geno's success, but why not look at the other team's starting lineup once in a while and acknowledge that a few changes on our part could be a good thing rather than just say 'we are who we are, you can't beat us.' I love who we are, and while we are always going to score plenty of points, I think one of the greatest strengths of this team is its great defense. Aside from Moriah and Stewie, I thought the defense last night kind of stunk. Obviously, running out the same lineup every game builds familiarity, consistency and teamwork. Geno makes in-game adjustments all the time, but for unique game situations like yesterday, when you know the other team's two best big kids are going to be out, would changing the starting lineup to one that could better defend a 4-guard opponent's obvious outside game strategy be a bad idea?

 

[WestCoastFan]

Geno should have drawn up a game plan calling for 65% accuracy on three-point field goal attempts - just as Muffet did.

Seems like DePaul shot well behind the arc as well. Interesting trend developing. Betcha Fla. St. and Mary-land follow suit. Need better coverage.