I don't think it was one of her better games, but other times I have seen her play I've been very impressed overall.
But not to me. Regardless of the pace they have both done the same job. They have held their opponent to the same score. in 40 minutes of play. Number of possessions does not affect the win or loss. Only the score matters.
They haven't done the same job though. One team gave them selves a much better chance to win the game than other.
Points per possession is exactly what adjusted defensive efficiency is which is what I am advocating for.
We played UCLA when we were dismantled with Injuries. I would welcome to play them now.
Youve brought up some good points. Their star is out. UConns 5 stars are out and UConn is clicking. I would like to face KState but that wont happen. Maybe it will take a few games for KState to adapt to their star not being on the floor and I understand that because UConn has had to do that too. Last nites game against Baylor did not impress me either team did not impress me. UConn is right now at a completely different level then most teams in WCBB. Can you imagine what could happen next season if UConn is healthy?
I think what visitingcock is trying to say is that the game has varying strategies used to win. One of the defensive strategies could be to limit the number of possessions by using the entire clock on offense. So while your numbers would be accurate if both teams had the same amount of opportunities, it isn't based in reality because the game is dictated by how those minutes are strategically used. I think you both are arguing different metrics. You're argument is basically like gathering data from a science experiment conducted a vacuum, whereas visitingcock is trying to measure outcomes with all potential factors that may affect the end result in a realistic scenario. Part of being an elite defense is also limiting turnovers on offense, getting rebounds, limiting the number of possessions, etc. The effects those numbers may have on defensive stats will not be reflected in your data.
Because they were having a conversation about defense.
My argument is not gathering data into a a science experiment in any way shape or form. It's literally evaluation how good of a defensive team someone is based on the ability to prevent the other team for scoring. Rebounds, turnovers, etc are ALL factured into my numbers. Visitingcock isn't measuring outcomes at all, just looking at a random number that means very little about how good of a defensive team you are. That in fact is the vacuum number that doesn't account for ANYTHING, including pace.
I am really trying to understand how that would every be the case. A team that allows less points per possession in a game but averages more points allowed will still allow less points scored on them against a team that allows more points per possession but holds teams to less points. The 40 minute stat can be artificially inflated due to pace of play but the per possession will hold regardless of pace.
Points per possession is an extremely important metric in basketball though. It's THE most important number when evaluating defenses (or offenses) against each other and has been for decades at this point. I am shocked so many people are acting like its some junk science and not wildly regarded as the more informative number.
I wonder about this a lot too.
Could be. Utah with Kneepkens would definitely have been better. But overall team speed at Colorado is too slow to dominate Marquette and Creighton. Yes, Sherrod is very quick. But the rest of the team is not, and especially Miller and Vonleh. And they don't have the size to make up for it. That says to me these would be competitive games.
It’s not about pace! It’s about adjusting the reality of your defense based on pace. If you play 60 possessions a game and the offense scores on 50 of those possessions your defense is terrible. On the other hand if you play 100 posssions a game and the offense scores on 50 of them you aren’t terrible. But without the context of PACE those two defenses looks the same when they are just unadjusted scoring numbers.
The team that lost 3 games and the one that hasn't lost is different, different starters, Geno has had to rework line-up, defense, offense and Paige is back from a 1-1\2 year being out. Not disrespectful just stating facts. .
In theory, slower pace of play would limit possessions for both teams. That per se doesn't make offensive efficiency more important, because regardless it's always relative to defensive efficiency.
This has always been a problem for UCLA. Close is a much better recruiter than she is a coach! She has underachieved over and over with her often very talented roster. Now, she has the aircraft carrier everyone wants and exceptional talent around her. In addition to this, she has yet another monster class coming in next year! Plus, yet another supremely talented big a year later!
I find this comment funny now after the South Carolina men's team beat Kentucky last night in part due to pace of play. Kentucky likes to play fast but we made them defend us for 30 seconds each possession which then made them uncharacteristically tired and sloppy on offense, and prevented them from gaining any sense of offensive rhythm. Conversation about pace were the highlight of the halftime report as well as the post game conversations. South Carolina dictating the pace of play led to a better defensive performance.
I look forward to the NCAA Tournament so we can see the various conference teams compete vs other conference teams. I see I am not the only biased conference homer.