I guess, but when you're speculating, basing that on actual stats seems to make more sense than just imagining what you think will happen.
First off how much are we in "disagreement" of “core.” On Monday post # 62 I said
In theory or reality there's simply no way.
PGs should be: Paige, Morgan, Kaitlyn, and KK.
I think you may have misinterpreted the intent of my listing positions and players in those positions. I don't disagree that Paige, Kaitlyn, KK will be primary point guards but I listed the others because Geno has the option to play those players there. Of course, some of the players listed will play most of the minutes in that position the others are a remote option if necessary (Injuries, blow-outs, garbage minute time, etc).
Sarah is a lot more capable than Ayanna and Ice though center wise She’s tougher and stronger under the basket and outrebounds everybody. When she and Joyce were on the same MCDAA team, she outrebounded Joyce by a lot, and Joyce was also known to be a good rebounder. Not afraid to get into position. Can also stretch the floor.
With regards to Sarah...she does not want to play the 1 position...she is more adept at the 2 and the 3. Geno's options at the one are touch and go. Jana - is not proven but has the size and has played the position well in international play, however, her effectiveness in the UConn system is yet to be proven. Ice played well at the end of last season. We should see the delayed sophomore jump from her given that she was injured for a year. Ayanna could play the 4 and the 5..., still, many questions remain on whether Ayanna will emerge as an effective player in any position.
You make good points and your sense of things may turn out to be right.
A “1” is a PG, not a center. In her interview,
My bad on the 1...I meant the 5. And, I did not say she wouldn't play where she was needed. I said that she doesn't want to play the 5 and that she is more adept at and prefers to play the 4 or the 3.
She herself has stated multiple times that pressure gets to her. She’s also said confidence is a big issue for herself. If she doesn’t believe in herself, she doesn’t do well. A PG needs confidence to run the floor. As stated in this article, a few had practices was all it took for her to lose confidence and not know what to do with the ball.
www.uconnwbbweekly.com
You can never have too many point guards. I saw absolutely no reason for Paige to have to play in the post last season but.....
There is absolutely a limit to PGs. PGs are typically small, too many and you won’t have enough height. UCLA is a perfect example. We couldn’t get anything done in the post due to Betts. We were too small and didn’t have enough forwards to deal with her.
I get that’s but you were trying to say that UCONN should have 6 PGs earlier, including a player who historically has ball confidence issues. That’s a little beyond the expression “you can never have too many…”
Paige will more than likely play quite a bit SF next year because UCONN's guards could be tremendous with more experience than the post players. Until/unless Aubrey comes back full up to speed.
Funny, I don’t remember Caroline as a “defensive liability”! I also don’t know why, if she is fully recovered, she would be limited to 10-15 minutes?
Pretty harsh to judge her by that one game. As I recall, the whole team struggled in that game! while she’s clearly not a pg, I think she will be fine handling the ball as a shooting guard. She is also an improving passer. what she really needs is a long period of health! If she can get that, I think we will all be very happy with all aspects of Azzi’s game!
Apologizing on the BY? What kind of rebel are you?!
Exactly.
As stated I can see 9 max – so when you bring up Gardler as 9 – okay --but that is maximum stretch as I 1st replied to you. And you mention Bird—what year?-- 2001-2002? I assume you meant that season – I can’t see total minutes or avg anywhere so I had to go on Huskygames site (figure things out too – they have some game score typosApologizing on the BY? What kind of rebel are you?!
There have been seasons when Auriemma did not use a deep rotation because there was no bench. Last season for example. There also have been seasons when Auriemma had a deeper bench but did not use them, such as Bent and Irwin before their senior seasons. There have been seasons when an unheralded HS recruit such as Gardler was ninth player in a deep rotation that often used 10 players, who became crucial in some tight games such as Rutgers. There have been seasons when the unquestioned #1 player in the country led the team in minutes with an average slightly over 27 (Bird). There have been seasons when the players who came in at the end were effectively the third string. Big Rig for example. Deeper rotations helped stretch many leads in dominant seasons, starting early in the game, rather than come in for mop up time.
While it’s true there are always calls for using a deeper rotation as the norm for a year, I seldom see it suggested as the key strategy for a tight game. At best I see a lament often made that some players had not been used more throughout the year so that they were prepared to step in if foul trouble or injury contributed to a tight game.
With so much variety in terms of bench length and talent over the years, and how they were used for a rotation, it’s fair to assume there are a variety of motives for hoping there is a deeper rotation this year. The tenor of the OP coming after last season, plus the oft expressed desire for a deeper rotation as the norm, led me to think that is the focus of the thread, but I could just as easily be the one who is wrong. If so, I apologize.
I have been on your side of the argument in regards to how a short rotation can win championships, with ND using only six rotational players as my often cited example. However, each of those players were elite and in the position and role for which they were best suited. In an injury plagued year for the Irish they at least lucked out in that regard, unlike a situation in which a team might be using a natural point guard as their power forward. Playing out of position additionally adds an extra tax on mental focus.
As an endurance athlete, I also have been on your side of the argument that an elite athlete can handle the physical demands of a 40 minute basketball game. But I also know that most endurance contests allow for the mind to zone out for stretches, such as with marathons, which is not an option for a basketball game. Mental fatigue, the inability to maintain focus for an extended time, is real and can be due to either genetic or environmental factors, or both. Having a deeper rotation as a norm that compensates for injury, fouls or mental fatigue in a tight game has been demonstrated not to be necessary to win championships, but has been demonstrated to make winning championships easier. In a 39 game season it would be great to have a deep rotation for at least 35 of those games in preparation for the other four.
). So I’ll go into their closer games. Dec 2021 vs ODU 14 point win Bird played 40 minutes. Dec 2021 14 pt win vs Oklahoma Bird played 39 minutes. Jan 2022 VS Tennessee 16 pt win Bird played 39. Jan 2022 9 point win vs Va Tech Bird played 36. April 2022 vs Oklahoma 12 point win Bird played 36.
The Bird season was ‘00, my error that I referred to her as unquestionable #1 in the country that year. Big Rig was effectively third team that year, as I said. That means ten players were used before her, all extending leads by their minutes played way before the end of the game. Indeed, a game against Georgia, a top team at the time, was behind 30 points before the end of the first half thanks to at least ten players all extending leads playing beautiful basketball.As stated I can see 9 max – so when you bring up Gardler as 9 – okay --but that is maximum stretch as I 1st replied to you. And you mention Bird—what year?-- 2001-2002? I assume you meant that season – I can’t see total minutes or avg anywhere so I had to go on Huskygames site (figure things out too – they have some game score typos
Unless you are talking about the 99-00 season? I can’t find any box scores. Maybe the NCAA has a history of this? When you refer to players like Big Rig I found a site Huskyhoops in which it shows Rig played in just 24 or 25 games and averaged one season a little above 4 minutes and another a little over 6 in her 2 seasons. What lead was she extending with so few minutes? And in some she would have been playing in blowouts. So what was her impact?
Or were you referring to 00-01 with Bird?
So, the above highlights what I believe the thread was also about more than just normal average minutes because Geno does play his stars an enormous amount in big games or tight games. He is not using his bench to wear down an opponent when he is loaded with all-American talent. He is going to use his All-Americans to wear down the other team. If in 01-02 was your point with Bird it highlights as I suggest. In order for her to have averaged only 27 and yet in those closest games of that season he played her between 36-40; this shows he uses his bench in comfortable wins and blowouts. But in close/big games he is looking for his stars to wear down or just prevail vs the opponent.
You can never have a perfect team without any weaknesses. As result other teams have weaknesses too. The best way Geno exploits the other teams is use his stars as much as he can. Not have them sit on the bench. I believe Geno has showed that over-and-over again.
To further this, the way Geno has recruited these many years – unless a rare game here or there- I don’t believe his team was driven or highlighted by extending leads because of his bench. Any season we can get stats and overall team performance I believe would show this which is why I separated normal (ie comfortable wins and blowouts) vs big games/ tight games.
So, two players you brought up (Bird and Big Rig) sort of highlight what I said, right?
And Geno now has a similar sized Morgan Cheli
I thoroughly enjoy these discussions. I had prepared a different type of response of which I disagree but one thing kept gnawing at me - now I feel more important- I get confused why you brought up Big Rig again. Why are you? I'm missing your point with her. What difference does it make that she was 3rd team vs our discussion? I think this could baseline my further arguments with you or anyone else. This is why in part why I made the 1st replied post on this thread separating/implying differnces of "normal" vs "tight." (i.e. Paige will will play 35-40 minutes in big games.).
Please take this in the fun it is meant to be -- no more.