- Joined
- Apr 24, 2022
- Messages
- 9,937
- Reaction Score
- 64,810
Whatever it was, the bookies weren’t buying it.
UConn and its bracket - the first two rounds at Gampel
- Thread starter tomcat
- Start date
oldude
bamboo lover
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2016
- Messages
- 20,265
- Reaction Score
- 193,348
UTSA at 0.1% to beat UConn!!!! So you’re telling me there’s a chance…….😁
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2022
- Messages
- 9,937
- Reaction Score
- 64,810
We’re doomed.
ctfjr
justice for alex pretti
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2011
- Messages
- 1,268
- Reaction Score
- 4,569
fixed it for you
MilfordHusky
Voice of Reason
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 38,318
- Reaction Score
- 135,032
I believe the 20 3-pointers were a team record.
Chen was a high-scoring, Ivy champion and league MVP who successfully molded her game to the team's needs by the end of last season. She was a model guard in the system because she was coachable, skilled, confident and curious and could run the offense with the right tempo or play the 2 if the offense was running through Paige, successfully operating in the space created by the gravity of the big three.
By then end of the year, like Paige, Chen placed a high value on possession. In fact, in the final-four she had no TO's in either game. That said, she was not as aggressive last year as KK is on both ends of the floor this year (see, for example, the Villanova demolition job). Some might say that KK's outside shot this year is not better than Chen's was last year. Chen had a reliable stop and pop but KK is obviously still working on that this year. Taking continued improvement in her 3 ball for granted, when KK finally learns to decelerate and reliable hit the stop and pop she will become unguardable (see, also, Big Fish)
KK learned the value of the ball from watching Paige and Chen last year and it shows. Last year, she was THE game-changer off the bench, without question. Her confidence and her energy were -- and will always be -- infectious. This year, I believe the coaches have figured out that KK plays best when she doesn't worry about conserving energy so they play her in sprints - which helped her settle into the starting groove and increased her two-way aggression.
K-9 is a more complete offensive player this year than KK was at this time last year (hits some three's with good form, has a stop and pop, is a natural cutter who can run the pick and roll, and is the winner of the looks-complicated-but-nevertheless-the-ball-went-into-the-hoop driving contest (she also ends up on the deck at a pace Jennifer RIzzotti and Nika Muhl would bless); however, she is neither the game-changing, tempo setting, defensive force off the bench that KK was last year nor the nasty 1v1 player in a 5 out that KK showed herself to be against, for example, SC in the championship game last year (and that's okay). Don't get me wrong, K9 can clearly get to the hoop but her drives are not as physically imposing as KK's filth. I can't quite put my finger on it but I believe K9 is better at running sets and actions this year than KK was last year (there is little question that the thought of KK in transition with Azzi, Strong and Blanca is a nightmare for opposing coach). KK, of course, has had her ups and downs but overall has clearly taken her game to another level this year in terms of floor leadership and game and tempo management.
Like Paige and Chen before them, KK and K9 are coachable, skilled, aggressive teammates who are always prepared to do whatever the team needs to win in a 3 guard rotation. In my opinion, they are the best starting and back up PG duo in the nation in a 3 (and sometime 4) guard rotation. With any luck, they'll have 6 more games to prove it.
.-.
Phil
Stats Geek
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2011
- Messages
- 4,817
- Reaction Score
- 7,506
A couple of things.
There a lot of UConn fatigue, which is understandable.
There are a lot of adjectives which can be used to describe UConn fans, and humble isn't near the top of the list.
The 48% is an ESPN number. I have no clue about how it's calculated but I do know a little bit about Nate Silver's model, which if I I thought had about a 35% but I just looked it up 40.2% I see it's higher than I remember, but that still translates into worse than a coin flip.
The selection committee identifies a number of metrics they look at, and it's natural for fans of any particular team, or fans of ABUC (anybody but UConn) to emphasize the metrics that best make the case.
As an additional benefit for those arguing in favor of UCLA, it's helpful that one of the metrics in favor of UConn is NET, while Quad one wins favors. NCAA says that the NET of UConn is better than that of UCLA, but they don't give you the numbers, so you don't know whether it's by a lot or a little. For all we know it could be rounding error. No one can explain exactly what NET means, so it's hard to use it as a solid argument. In contrast, is close to trivial to define quad one wins, and the disparity between UCLA UConn seems pretty dramatic. The quad system is extremely coarse.
Beat number 25 at home in a buzzer beater and it's worth exactly the same as beating the number one team in the country by 20. How is that remotely reasonable?
Beat number 25 at home in a buzzer beater and it's worth a lot more beating number 26 at home by 20 points.
Beat number 25 at home in a buzzer beater and it's a quad 1 win unless that opponent goes on to stumble and lose a couple and drops out of the top 25.
But surely the UCLA supporters will say, the vast number of quad one opponents of UCLA and the top in the nation strength of schedule is worth a lot!
The UCLA supporters will downplay the fact that the weaker strength of schedule of UConn and the fewer quad one wins are all incorporated into the NET calculation and it still favors UConn.
I'm not at all surprised that so many people are trying to find ways to argue that someone other than you, deserves to be the top overall team.
Gus Mahler
Popular Composer
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2015
- Messages
- 5,163
- Reaction Score
- 19,932
Wow. Great analysis, great post. Thanks.
Easy to answer: Yes and No. I believe KK was better than Chen last year and she performed her best in the Final Four and this year she has improved significantly to Tue point where she’s the best pure all around and most efficient PG in the country.
She played 12 games, so yes. I wouldn't call Elena Delle Donne a former Husky, though.
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2021
- Messages
- 4,516
- Reaction Score
- 21,095
I think of this as a difference in "STYLES". IMHO Chen was the
style player that GENO needed last year, KK is the style that
the Huskies need this year. So, I can't see a real reason for a "better than"
distinction. As for K9 vs KK. They are both exceptional defensive
players (a clear edge to KK), but offensively I see an edge to
Kayleigh for her intermediate scoring threats. The real question
(that I would pose) is "Who finds the most IMPACKFUL way to
hit the hardwood"?? My answer: KK wins "by a nose", but that
K9 gets all the "style points"!! I love this discussion!!! GO HUSKIES!
- Joined
- May 5, 2025
- Messages
- 84
- Reaction Score
- 544
....like 'wider'. Her play in the paint, to me anyway, is not impressive. Gets the ball low, basically pushes, and bullies underneath. That's NOT basketball. Too slow, her game will never translate to the WNBA. Even European game as well. Give me the complete game of Sarah, and Azzi any day. That's basketball
.-.
oldude
bamboo lover
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2016
- Messages
- 20,265
- Reaction Score
- 193,348
Every year somebody makes a case that somebody got screwed in their bracket. Honestly, it’s a tiresome exercise. The process was well understood by everyone before Selection Sunday, so much so that Charlie Creme got the top 8 teams completely correct.
I think UConn will roll through their region to the final four. This joker highlights tOSU, a team UConn beat by 30. As for UCLA, I keep hearing that they have both Duke & LSU in their region. But nobody mentions that those teams have to play each other before they get the opportunity to play UCLA.
There is this thing that goes on every year for some that seems to suggest that no really good team should have to play any other team that’s any good. That’s not how the NCAA Tournament works. I will continue to remind everyone that UConn beat down 3 x #1’s on their way to the championship last season, and as a UConn fan that was as good as it gets.
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2016
- Messages
- 2,162
- Reaction Score
- 7,840
Not even close..Hammon..,Hildago..an Miles are all better offensive an defensive players than KK an better passes too
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2013
- Messages
- 5,364
- Reaction Score
- 25,983
A former 3 year starter at PG for Harvard and two year pro.
Former Harvard co-captain, professional basketball player Maura Healey elected governor of Massachusetts
Healey is also the first open lesbian to be elected governor in the U.S.
oldude
bamboo lover
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2016
- Messages
- 20,265
- Reaction Score
- 193,348
By Hammon, I assume you mean Harmon, and no she is not a better offensive and defensive player than KK. KK is a better shooter, has a better A/TO ratio (2nd in the nation) and has more steals than Harmon. Harmon shoots slightly better from 3, on far fewer attempts and she is a slightly better foul shooter.
The fact that the two players are remarkably similar makes the best case that KK is deserving of honorable mention AA recognition.
.-.
RockyMTblue2
Don't Look Up!
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 23,993
- Reaction Score
- 109,720
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2014
- Messages
- 1,323
- Reaction Score
- 5,123
I didn’t see anyone actually answer your question. I’d say that KK definitely contributes more than Chen did, at this point of the season. Her defense and recent offense outweigh Chen’s somewhat better shooting.
I don’t have an answer to the bonus question.
But what do I win if I’m deemed correct with my answer?
RockyMTblue2
Don't Look Up!
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 23,993
- Reaction Score
- 109,720
I will stick to my origial answers, which essential said you are comparing apples and oranges. KK is a better defender for sure. However that better shooting of Kaitlin had an uncanny knack of showing up at a ridiculously fine time to spark the offense. That is a powerful gift.
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2014
- Messages
- 1,323
- Reaction Score
- 5,123
I think she does a really good job of using the assets/skills that she has. One of those being her bulk. She may not make it as a WNBA pro, but she is an excellent college player. A bit (although shorter) like Courtney Paris or the Pili girl last year - neither of whom turned out to be a very good pro, but both of whom were great college players.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2022
- Messages
- 9,937
- Reaction Score
- 64,810
I watched as many of Audi's HS games as I could -- which turned out to be not many, since Archbishop Garrigan HS didn't make much of an effort to tape them or post them. Lots of highlights circulated but that's not the same thing.
One game that stood out was against Hopkins HS. Yes, Paige's old school. She was long gone, but some of the standouts from her day were still there as seniors, like Nunu Agara and Taylor Woodson. Let me first say the Hopkins blew them off the court. But it wasn't because of something Audi did or did not do. Her team was simply too undeveloped, especially the guards. What I mainly remember from that game was how formidable Audi was in every aspect of the team -- she was the main passer for the high post, the main rebounder, occasionally even the press breaker against Hopkins, and she was clearly the emotional centre of the team. I was very impressed.
From that point on, I really hoped someone would recruit her and worried that no one would, which would have been a mistake. Well, thank goodness for Bill Fennelly. At the D1 level, the flaws in her game -- mainly her defense -- are apparent. But her virtues as a scorer and rebounder are significant. I have no idea if she has a real chance at the next level. However, at this level, I really enjoy seeing her play. No one should diminish her talent or her right to be on the court.
Glad to hear my post made sense. Thank you for the inspiring question.
.-.
Gus Mahler
Popular Composer
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2015
- Messages
- 5,163
- Reaction Score
- 19,932
You win my enduring trust and respect. And gratitude.
OK - so after today's games I decided to check the 16 seeds and 15 seeds, because while the UTSA game was a fine win, it did not feel like a #1 seed/16 seed match-up. I know the committee does all sorts of arcane mumbo jumbo to calculate their seeding, and Massey is not involved in their process and is just a logarithmic calculation, but especially when you get way down in the weeds of the back end of the conferences you got to use something, so ... opponents for the top eight seeds by
Massey rating and Massey sos, plus home state:
Uconn - 108, 89, TX
UCLA - 131, 199, CA
*Texas - 103, 117, MO
*SC - 224, 312, LA
LSU - 166, 240. FL
Mich - 159, 241, MA
Vandy - 149, 341, NC
Iowa - 176, 376, NJ
I put in geography because that has often been used to defend stupid seedings. The two * are for 'play in games for 16 seeds (which I dislike) but doesn't explain how the strongest of the 15/16 seeds ended up in a play-in game in SC. Nor how the second strongest with by far the strongest SOS ended up 1900 miles away from home in Storrs CT, while two much weaker teams 39 miles away, and 140 miles away ended up as 15 seeds playing 1000 miles away from their homes.
I mean - just look as the SOS if you want to knock Massey's ratings - two teams do not look anything like the other 6, and 4 of those six are exactly what you expect from 16 seeds, and yet only one of them was actually in a playoff game against an even weaker 16 seed type team, while one of the two 'oddities' was also in a playoff game with another of the classic 16 seed no hopers.
This obviously has no bearing on who wins the NCAA tournament. It doesn't matter in the least in terms of the next 5 games, but it just points out how completed messed up the NCAA committee experts are. I would love hearing their justifications on the 15/16 seeds and I suspect the 14 and 13 seeds would raise similar questions about their process.
Massey rating and Massey sos, plus home state:
Uconn - 108, 89, TX
UCLA - 131, 199, CA
*Texas - 103, 117, MO
*SC - 224, 312, LA
LSU - 166, 240. FL
Mich - 159, 241, MA
Vandy - 149, 341, NC
Iowa - 176, 376, NJ
I put in geography because that has often been used to defend stupid seedings. The two * are for 'play in games for 16 seeds (which I dislike) but doesn't explain how the strongest of the 15/16 seeds ended up in a play-in game in SC. Nor how the second strongest with by far the strongest SOS ended up 1900 miles away from home in Storrs CT, while two much weaker teams 39 miles away, and 140 miles away ended up as 15 seeds playing 1000 miles away from their homes.
I mean - just look as the SOS if you want to knock Massey's ratings - two teams do not look anything like the other 6, and 4 of those six are exactly what you expect from 16 seeds, and yet only one of them was actually in a playoff game against an even weaker 16 seed type team, while one of the two 'oddities' was also in a playoff game with another of the classic 16 seed no hopers.
This obviously has no bearing on who wins the NCAA tournament. It doesn't matter in the least in terms of the next 5 games, but it just points out how completed messed up the NCAA committee experts are. I would love hearing their justifications on the 15/16 seeds and I suspect the 14 and 13 seeds would raise similar questions about their process.
All of these 15&16 seeds are only in the field by virtue of winning their league bid.
Most likely committee spending little time on getting these teams placed perfectly as only 1 every 10 years wins a game.
Committee not using Massey.
You raise a good point about travel. Sending lambs to slaughter could be done closer to home...and I believe ncaa funds tournament travel.
Most likely committee spending little time on getting these teams placed perfectly as only 1 every 10 years wins a game.
Committee not using Massey.
You raise a good point about travel. Sending lambs to slaughter could be done closer to home...and I believe ncaa funds tournament travel.
Only one 14/15/16 seed has ever won a game since they went to 64 teams back in the in 1994. so 1 every 32 years! or 1 in 384 or 0.2% chance of winning.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2022
- Messages
- 9,937
- Reaction Score
- 64,810
I don’t entirely follow the first half of your post. But the gist of the last bit seems to be that the committee did some of the 15/16 seeds wrong, at least geographically. That looks right just on the face of it without any need for Massey or much in the way of statistical analysis. UTSA didn’t need to travel all the way to Gampel or FDU go to Ames while Cal Baptist go to stay in Westwood or Southern could play in Columbia. It’s not about fairness to the higher seeds, but to the lower seeds. Why screw them over that way?
Last edited:
.-.