Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="diggerfoot, post: 5007802, member: 1673"] Not sure which post of yours to best respond, since it is the cumulative that has me wondering. But let’s start with you begging the question by saying there is no way Auriemma would play a deep bench if the stars were healthy in a tight game. This veers from the intent of discussing whether the normal rotation expands from the past injury plagued seasons due to the abundance of talent and the hope for a healthy roster. In UConn’s most dominant seasons there were, by definition, no tight games. Also in those seasons there were deeper rotations. Indeed, even in the tight NC game of 1995 there was a rotation of 8. Not deep, but not skimpy either. Were we dominant because a deeper rotation made the stars more rested to play at peak efficiency? Or because the talent warranted a deeper rotation and there was effectively little drop off when they came in? Likely a little of both, but the evidence clearly reveals a correlation between deeper rotations and dominance. Now even in an otherwise dominant season there yet may be one or two tight games, and in those one or two games there may be deviation from the norm of a deeper rotation during a season of dominance. Such occurred against Stanford when we only scored 12 points in the first half, but outside of that bewildering exception the team had a deep rotation that year. Again, this is what the hope and discussion was really intended to be, that the norm for next season will be a deep rotation, even if there are one or two game exceptions. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach