Thoughts about the ND game

[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.

 

[Geno-ista]

Besides thinking that you HR are way off base- who should we have sat more- and who should have played more?

 

[WestCoastFan]

Absolutely agree

Did you observe how unbelievably slow Mabry Sr. is?
She had at least a quarter of the court lead on Mo's breakaway and still hardly even tried to keep up.

Absolutely agree

Did you observe how unbelievably slow Mabry Sr. is?
She had at least a quarter of the court lead on Mo's breakaway and still hardly even tried to keep up.

Mabrey Jr ain't much faster. Sure can throw it up though. She reminded me of my Dad driving to the hoop. Bull in a china shop. But hey, if they go in, then giddy up!

 

[BRS24]

I wondered about this as well. My answer: Geno knew after the opening burst that his starters could beat ND. So he brought in the bench players to let them get experience in a high pressure game against a bit time opponent. Did you watch Geno on sidelines. No hands through the hair, no looking at the assistants and asking them "what the hell are you teaching them?" He seemed like he was in control so he let people work through challenges and got valuable tape.

Perhaps the ND and DePaul games will prove to be this year's "Stanford" game. Lots of tape watching. Lots of discussion and teaching about different styles of play vs. UConn, and how they will need to work hard in every game to succeed.

 

[Huskies Rule]

Statistically, Mabrey's been significantly better than the UConn freshmen thus far.

Mabrey looked really good (until she got a face full of Mo), but it must be incredibly difficult for a kid like Lou to go from being the nation's #1 recruit and scoring 30 points a game to coming off the bench for the defending national champs, desperate for playing time, and knowing that the first dumb play she makes will be her last as she immediately gets yanked back to the bench, not knowing if she'll ever get back into the game.

This uncertainty and fear of getting pulled has to be affecting Lou's head and could very well account for her shooting struggles. Lou is obviously an incredibly talented basketball player. I just hope she has the mental toughness to fight her way through.

 

[uconnfan68]

Mabrey looked really good (until she got a face full of Mo), but it must be incredibly difficult for a kid like Lou to go from being the nation's #1 recruit and scoring 30 points a game to coming off the bench for the defending national champs, desperate for playing time, and knowing that the first dumb play she makes will be her last as she immediately gets yanked back to the bench, not knowing if she'll ever get back into the game.

This uncertainty and fear of getting pulled has to be affecting Lou's head and could very well account for her shooting struggles. Lou is obviously an incredibly talented basketball player. I just hope she has the mental toughness to fight her way through.

Geno will overlook her shooting IF she makes up for it with defense, rebounding, and movement on offense. If she just waits to launch 3s and isn't making them, well, have a seat.

 

[huskeynut]

Mabrey looked really good (until she got a face full of Mo), but it must be incredibly difficult for a kid like Lou to go from being the nation's #1 recruit and scoring 30 points a game to coming off the bench for the defending national champs, desperate for playing time, and knowing that the first dumb play she makes will be her last as she immediately gets yanked back to the bench, not knowing if she'll ever get back into the game.

This uncertainty and fear of getting pulled has to be affecting Lou's head and could very well account for her shooting struggles. Lou is obviously an incredibly talented basketball player. I just hope she has the mental toughness to fight her way through.

I don't believe this is an issue. Lou knows and understands what needs to be done. She knows what she has to work on in her game.

Her game is slowly improving as the season unfolds. It is a huge jump from high school AA to D1 college basketball, especially at UCONN. Geno has said, and so has Lou, that she needs to do the little things in a game, rebounds, passes, defense and going inside to score. As she does these, her outside shot will fall. She will stop thinking about the 3 and shoot within the flow of the game.

Lou is a tremendous talent that will be just fine. Let's let her game evolve and wacth the progress.

 

[PhillyCoach]

So it begins - Stewie is no longer the worst defender on god's green earth, but has passed the torch to the new champion! All hail, Lou!

(he must really like her game and her potential to start riding her this early in the season!)

Uc - I like how you shed the light on aspects that are not obvious to others. First, Geno's motivation style. He hits hard and makes it clear what is necessary. The best part is ----Geno knows that Lou (and many others, but not all on UConn team) is the type of person who handles Negative motivation. And a "tip of the hat to ya" for recognizing & sharing the insight about Geno's appreciation of Lou's game/potential. IMHO Geno sees a "Stewie Lite." Lou (and IMO Collier) have the game/experience/talent to fill the entire stat sheet.
Last point for the doubters - Lou is not slow. Her length makes her deceptive. She covers ground when needed. I will admit that she does not have the quickest feet, but her anticipation and BBIQ puts her into the middle of the action. She just needs more time. Remember, Stewie took awhile to find her comfort zone as a frosh. No one can be Stewie--but they can model themselves after her "total game style".

 

[CL82]

Mabrey looked really good (until she got a face full of Mo),.

I love this quote.

I also loved how frustrated Marina Mabrey got in the second half. I saw at least one more shove prior to the one that was called. She was shut down and their wasn't a darn thing that she could do about it. As amazing an athlete as Stewie is, I think that Jefferson is the most complete basketball player I've seen in long time.

Everybody's pretty good until they get a full face of Mo.

 

[JoePgh]

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.

Now that is the one statement that you have made on this thread that I agree with! It is a thought-provoking analogy.

Indeed, what if Moriah was gone and Stewie and Tuck were injured, and UConn had to play ND with its full complement of people including Turner and Reimer? What odds would you give on the outcome of that game? If KLS had an amazing game for a freshman and UConn managed to shoot 65% on 3's because of it, making 13 threes, could UConn stay within 10 points of ND in South Bend?

As to how the ND team will react to the loss, I don't think they will say, "Sheesh! We made 13 3's and we still lost??" Instead, I think they will say, "We stayed within 10 points of them on their home floor despite playing without our All-American center and another very good forward. On a neutral court, with both teams at full strength, our chances to win should be very good."

And they would be right about that.

 

[UcMiami]

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?

To your question re lineups - it is a three fold answer:
1. He likes to say when asked 'How are you going to handle ____' regarding an upcoming opponent that he isn't that worried because the real question is 'How is the opponent going to handle ____' specific to a particular strength of the current Uconn team. His short hand response in special years ' We have Diana, and they don't!' The point being he is more concerned with putting the best version of his team on the floor and making the other team adjust to him, than making constant adjustments to the starting team he puts out. His adjustments come a few minutes into the game if necessary with the first subs he chooses.

2. He likes to create defined roles for especially the younger players, but for the team as a whole. Part of that is establishing a consistent starting lineup, so his players can get into a rhythm of how they will be used. Starting and coming off the bench are very different processes for players, and affect the psychology and preparation that players use. Not knowing what will happen at the start of each game day is confusing for the players.

3. Chemistry is a weird beast on a team - good chemistry can change a good team into a championship team, and bad can take a championship team and turn it into an also ran. Creating a fixed starting five allows those five players to establish a rhythm and chemistry that is good, and establishing fixed patterns of substitutions, and fixed combinations on the floor throughout the game helps maintain that chemistry. Randomness in playing combinations and roles can make the team play uncoordinated and inefficient. Uconn is fairly unique in continuing to play well through garbage time in blow-out wins, but even Uconn can play some really ugly ball at the end of games when the players on the floor are in the wrong mixture and haven't established their own chemistry. Sometimes Geno just ignores it, mostly he will make adjustments so his eyes are not offended!