UConn team attitude

[Charliebball]

Arike ALWAYS has only one thing on her mind. Arike is also a Junior and her teammates and Muffet have learned not to expect to get the ball back once it gets into her hands.

you see Coco if she played that way for Geno she'd be on the bench..........

 

[CocoHusky]

you see Coco if she played that way for Geno she'd be on the bench.....

If she was at UCONN bench she wouldn't be hitting FF and Championship winning shots for ND.

 

[Charliebball]

If she was at UCONN bench she wouldn't be hitting FF and Championship winning shots for ND.

or for UConn...................that's my point.

 

[mkwstar23]

Maybe it's just a matter of personality's? The UCONN girls are very nice and well trained. Maybe it comes off robotic?
They lack that killer in late game situations...great year and fantastic season they just played badly at the wrong time and caught ND the night they play as well as they possibly could...anxious for next year...

There are not many DT, Sue Bird, Shea Ralph types currently in a husky uniform.

Just a thought.

 

[Papa33]

or for UConn....that's my point.

Ogunbowale hit huge dramatic shots to close out both UConn and MSU. But there's a context: for both games her shooting totals were: 15/42— only 35.7%. And against MSU she took 40% of ND's shots. Which partially explains why ND needed that miracle shot to beat MSU.
In the long run, while volume shooters like her and Mitchell and Carter can create and make such dramatic shots, there are considerable liabilities. I'll continue to endorse UConn's scoring by sharing, with a high assist-to-shot ratio.
That said, a MoJeff or DT or Maya is nice to have when a basket is desperately needed. And I believe that Crystal, with more confidence and experience, could be that ingredient. And the new Williams kid could be another possibility-- but within the UConn offensive system.

 

[the Q]

We don't have a lot of practice in end of game possessions where we need a score to win/tie. Heck, our starters are out usually before the 4th quarter.

So when this situation presents itself we seem a bit panicked. The same thing happened with Chong last year. As great as our team is we don't have a player that wants to get in the 1-4 set and drive to the hoop and create. Danger is really the only girl capable of this right?
Instead we frantically try to force the ball into Lou's hands on the perimeter and of course what's that going to do?

I think that was a big problem. In the past it was give the ball to stewie, Maya, DT, and get out of the way.

I will never understand why dangerfield didn’t get to the rim at will against the Mabry.

 

[the Q]

This is also the 2nd FF In a row where the women were soundly beaten to every loose ball. And just out hustled.

Plus they threw up a ton of shots that weren’t hitting the rim and missing easy layups.

Those are all mental things.

 

[AussieHusky]

An isolation play DOES NOT use a screener. The purpose of the isolation play is to take advantage of the ball handlers ability to get by the defender one on one. A screener brings a help defender and that would defeat the main purpose of calling isolation. Isolation plays are also usually run from the top of the key or you can clear out one side of the court.
The play was run from the wing and it was a simple screen and roll=ND "chin action". Note that after setting the screen Jessica rolls to the basket and gets pretty good rebounding position on Gabby. If that ball had come off on the ball side UCONN would have been in trouble because of how Jessica was positioned.

You are probably right, and you probably know more about this then me. But I guess where I am confused is that, I thought that the timing of the ball handler's decision in a screen and roll is almost immediate? That is either throw it to the roll player or make a fairly instant decision like shoot or dribble drive? My take on it is that the screen was purposely set to create a mismatch of defender so that the ball handler can have an advantage in the iso-play. Arike was not looking to hit the roll player or shoot right away, she was looking to take her defender on one on one, and Shepard actually vacated the ball side of the rim to make room for Arike to drive to the hoop if Pheesa crowded her. Again, I may be wrong, but you are probably more experienced. Thanks for explaining further.

 

[AussieHusky]

I will never understand why dangerfield didn’t get to the rim at will against the Mabry.

I agree with your observation and I was thinking the same thing. But then I realized that ND played zone for the most part - crowded lane, and with Crystal's size, finishing at the rim would be very difficult. UCONN has been shown to lift defenders to allow back cuts or dribble drives, but it usually only works in man to man defense.

 

[AussieHusky]

Ogunbowale hit huge dramatic shots to close out both UConn and MSU. But there's a context: for both games her shooting totals were: 15/42— only 35.7%. And against MSU she took 40% of ND's shots. Which partially explains why ND needed that miracle shot to beat MSU.
In the long run, while volume shooters like her and Mitchell and Carter can create and make such dramatic shots, there are considerable liabilities. I'll continue to endorse UConn's scoring by sharing, with a high assist-to-shot ratio.
That said, a MoJeff or DT or Maya is nice to have when a basket is desperately needed. And I believe that Crystal, with more confidence and experience, could be that ingredient. And the new Williams kid could be another possibility-- but within the UConn offensive system.

I agree with you wholeheartedly, and I don't think those that are calling for some iso- or one on one type plays are advocating anything outside of the UCONN system. UCONN's system in beautiful to watch, and makes use of almost every level of talent (screening, passing, cutting, etc.). But incorporating plays whereby players such as Meg or even Crystal are isolated in mismatches where they can use their dribbling skills and quickness to create their own shots will probably enhance the system. Hell no, I would not want a steady diet of Carter or Mitchell type plays or player on UCONN. But it helps to have a full arsenal, for that one or two plays to use in certain game situation.
In defense of Arike...I know she is a volume shooter, but in this particular case (FF), there weren't that many other options for ND. There were basically three offensive threats to take shots, and one (JY) was in foul trouble for a good chunk of time. The other, M2 was the pg who was being hounded by MSU. That left only Arike to take shots for the most part. I believe that if they had their full complement of players, she would not have been allowed to do that, with that %age.

 

[CocoHusky]

You are probably right, and you probably know more about this then me. But I guess where I am confused is that, I thought that the timing of the ball handler's decision in a screen and roll is almost immediate? That is either throw it to the roll player or make a fairly instant decision like shoot or dribble drive? My take on it is that the screen was purposely set to create a mismatch of defender so that the ball handler can have an advantage in the iso-play. Arike was not looking to hit the roll player or shoot right away, she was looking to take her defender on one on one, and Shepard actually vacated the ball side of the rim to make room for Arike to drive to the hoop if Pheesa crowded her. Again, I may be wrong, but you are probably more experienced. Thanks for explaining further.

Some additional thoughts Arike is a unique player in that she thinks shot first and shot last and shot almost always.
If you are really convinced that you are going to beat the defender on a screen and roll with the dribble you would not run it to the baseline side because you have less room and the baseline become an extra defender. The defense was not bad on the play, Napheesa was decisive in switching, she funneled Arike to the baseline and would have had the drive to the basket cut off. Arike was just literally 1 step back better and got that shot off before it could be affected.

 

[CocoHusky]

I will never understand why dangerfield didn’t get to the rim at will against the Mabry.

Because ND was mostly playing 2 3 zone and at the rim she would have been met by Nelson, Shepard or Westbeld. Then what?

 

[AussieHusky]

Some additional thoughts Arike is a unique player in that she thinks shot first and shot last and shot almost always.
If you are really convinced that you are going to beat the defender on a screen and roll with the dribble you would not run it to the baseline side because you have less room and the baseline become an extra defender. The defense was not bad on the play, Napheesa was decisive in switching, she funneled Arike to the baseline and would have had the drive to the basket cut off. Arike was just literally 1 step back better and got that shot off before it could be affected.

Thanks Coco for the explanation, much clearer now.

 

[MadDogRevival]

To suggest that the Huskies were somehow less motivated does an incredible disservice to some wonderful, highly motivated young women.

No it does not. It's basic human psychology. It's incredibly difficult to stay on top for a long period of time, which is why it's so impressive that Geno has done what he has done for so long. I don't care whether it's being a chef at a top notch restaurant, a long distance runner, or a WNBA player. To get out of bed and generate motivation when you have already been wildly successful is super human.
Two seniors have 2 Natties already and 3 . Have only lost fewer than 5 times in 4 years. Throw in a coach who has won double digit natties.
OF COURSE it's more difficult for them to get motivated than a team and a coach who have never won it and a program that hasn't won it in 17 years. OF COURSE!
And that's no insult to the UConn women, and it's artificial sensitivity to pretend that it is. It's amazing they have done what they have done, especially given the fact that they have already done it so many times.

 

[oldude]

No it does not. It's basic human psychology. It's incredibly difficult to stay on top for a long period of time, which is why it's so impressive that Geno has done what he has done for so long. I don't care whether it's being a chef at a top notch restaurant, a long distance runner, or a WNBA player. To get out of bed and generate motivation when you have already been wildly successful is super human.
Two seniors have 2 Natties already and 3 . Have only lost fewer than 5 times in 4 years. Throw in a coach who has won double digit natties.
OF COURSE it's more difficult for them to get motivated than a team and a coach who have never won it and a program that hasn't won it in 17 years. OF COURSE!
And that's no insult to the UConn women, and it's artificial sensitivity to pretend that it is. It's amazing they have done what they have done, especially given the fact that they have already done it so many times.

So are you suggesting that on Friday night vs ND, the Huskies were not sufficiently motivated and did not play hard?

 

[Longtime fan]

So are you really saying , because you don't like the league, the wins don't count?
Please, that is the most ridiculous thing I have ever read on here

Pretty much , yes.

I would not count those wins in any winning streak. I would never use them as a measure of anything, pertaining to this team's ability or progress.

You take great pride beating Tulsa by 45 points every year? You boast about that victory? Good for you. Maybe you should make tee shirts with our record against AAC teams.

Have you ever heard the term, Pyrrhic Victory? In our case, the " devastating effects on us, of those victories, is deception." A sense that we are greater than we truly are.

Obviously the record of wins in this abominable league counts, because the " talking heads" remind us, every game, about how great UCONN is, based ( largely ) upon this endless streak of
victories ( you can't talk about our winning streak at all if you include the recent NCAA tournament
record ).......the miracle we have achieved........" never lost a game since the AAC started" ; then they mention, " the actual number of consecutive wins ( some absurd, totally empty number now
in the " hundreds.").

Only it turns out that our win streak in the AAC is indicative of nothing.

That's my point.

Of course I hate the league. So does UCONN. Sadly, and unfairly, it is the only one we have.

But I would prefer never again to hear the team's excellence " measured" in the context of our AAC domination. I would like there to be a broadcasting law evoked that prohibits any announcer from mentioning anything about UCONN and the AAC. At least until we have two losses or more within the conference.

There are plenty of other "landmarks" of the Lady Huskies' miraculous accomplishments which I, and everyone else, can respect. But not this one.

 

[Los24]

I think the biggest problem is UConn not getting nearly enough height and length on their roster. Makes it near impossible to defend a team like Notre Dame. It's still early but just look at the success MSU is having guarding them.

There is no accident that UConn's best stretch against ND this season was when Stevens, Walker, Collier, Dangerfield, Nurse were on the floor in Hartford. Arguably our biggest, longest, and most athletic lineup. That team scored AND defended.

So you list a line up with perhaps our best player that is 6'3"

 

[MadDogRevival]

So are you suggesting that on Friday night vs ND, the Huskies were not sufficiently motivated and did not play hard?

Not suggesting anything at all. I plainly and clearly laid out my thoughts, which I concisely reiterate here:
It is more difficult to get motivated if you have had massive success, like UConn, than if you have had limited success, like ND.
That's it.
If somebody wants to make the argument that ND was more motivated, then my opinion is that that's an easy argument to make, because it would be perfectly human and normal for them to be more motivated, given that not one person on the team had won an NC, while the UConn women have been wildly successful.

What your question does is try to turn that basic, universal human psychology concept into an attack on our team, which it was not.

Was UConn "sufficiently" motivated? I have no idea how to measure that, but I have no problem saying that ND may well have been more motivated.

Did UConn not "play hard"? Again, you're just trying to convert my simple observation into an attack, which it was not. Of course they played hard.

It's really quite simple - motivation is more difficult to come by when you have already had historic success.

Do you doubt that?

 

[OneTrickPony]

I didn't see a Final Four team this year where the motivation wasn't off the charts...every game a nail-biter until the very last second...the parity at this level, at least, is pretty breath-taking.

 

[oldude]

Not suggesting anything at all. I plainly and clearly laid out my thoughts, which I concisely reiterate here:
It is more difficult to get motivated if you have had massive success, like UConn, than if you have had limited success, like ND.
That's it.
If somebody wants to make the argument that ND was more motivated, then my opinion is that that's an easy argument to make, because it would be perfectly human and normal for them to be more motivated, given that not one person on the team had won an NC, while the UConn women have been wildly successful.

What your question does is try to turn that basic, universal human psychology concept into an attack on our team, which it was not.

Was UConn "sufficiently" motivated? I have no idea how to measure that, but I have no problem saying that ND may well have been more motivated.

Did UConn not "play hard"? Again, you're just trying to convert my simple observation into an attack, which it was not. Of course they played hard.

It's really quite simple - motivation is more difficult to come by when you have already had historic success.

Do you doubt that?

While you are certainly entitled to your opinion, with all do respect, I reject the premise upon which you base that opinion. Great players are always highly motivated, and UConn has great players, who, if anything, were more highly motivated after last year’s disappointment.

Was Michael Jordan any less motivated after winning 5 NBA championships? Here’s a hint. When he won his 6th, he was the finals MVP for the 6th time in his career.

Closer to home, was Stewie any less motivated after winning her 3rd straight national championship? You can probably guess where I’m going with this one. When Stewie, Mo & Tuck all played brilliantly while winning their 4th straight championship, Stewie earned her 4th straight finals MOP.

I could go on with more examples, but I’ll stop there.

 

[HuskylnSC]

Did I really see Kia deck Marina or did I imagine it. I saw the passion from UConn but it was under control. They are trained not to celebrate but to get back on defense.

Because a player doesn’t scream and dance and wave her arms after every made basket doesn’t mean she doesn’t have passion. The kind of hysterical actions I saw from one player only indicates a look at me attitude that detracts from the team mentality that I love in our players

A player can go 6 for 21 and still be the star of the game because of one shot. The one shot doesn’t reflect on the game.

The game UConn played was enough to win the game. They scored more two point and three point baskets than the other team. The UConn game plan worked perfectly. The game did not.

Just one question, when was the last time CD had to hold Geno back from the refs? Please don’t tell me the refs don’t cause you to lose a game.

I am stunned by the hyperbolic reaction to one loss when our team played so well and so hard

 

[oldude]

Did I really see Kia deck Marina or did I imagine it. I saw the passion from UConn but it was under control. They are trained not to celebrate but to get back on defense.

Because a player doesn’t scream and dance and wave her arms after every made basket doesn’t mean she doesn’t have passion. The kind of hysterical actions I saw from one player only indicates a look at me attitude that detracts from the team mentality that I love in our players

A player can go 6 for 21 and still be the star of the game because of one shot. The one shot doesn’t reflect on the game.

The game UConn played was enough to win the game. They scored more two point and three point baskets than the other team. The UConn game plan worked perfectly. The game did not.

Just one question, when was the last time CD had to hold Geno back from the refs? Please don’t tell me the refs don’t cause you to lose a game.

I am stunned by the hyperbolic reaction to one loss when our team played so well and so hard

Yes, Kia pancaked Mabrey. I am wondering if that goes back to the little kerfuffle between Pheesa, Kia & Mabrey in the regular season game at the XL center in December.

As for CD dragging Geno back to the bench, I’m sure she did it just last season, perhaps during the ND game? I think wrestling Geno back to the bench is part of CD’s job description.

 

[MadDogRevival]

While you are certainly entitled to your opinion, with all do respect, I reject the premise upon which you base that opinion.

We can respectfully disagree. Thank you for the thoughts.

 

[hoopingcrane]

I would rather look at it differently as opposed to being unappreciative. An analogy, may not be perfect....your teenager is an "A" student, always top of her class. You are proud as a parent, especially considering all of the distractions that affect that age group, and you see how her peers are performing, and you go...I am so blessed to have such a focused and high character teenager in this day and age. But occasionally your "A" student gets a "C", still pass, but below yours and their expectation. What would be your response. Would it be, the "C" is no problem, you always get "A's" so no biggie. Or would you say...well, you got a "C" this time, below your expectation, so let's try to figure out why you got a "C" when you always get a higher mark. Maybe you need extra help, tutoring or suggestions...? As a parent, and like most parents, I assume the response would be the later. The responses you see are not for lack of appreciation for our Huskies and all that they have accomplished, it is more a collective sharing of their own disappointment with the outcome. I know that they are disappointed at the outcome they have said so themselves), and are probably at their wits end as to why this happened. We as die-hard fans are just expressing our opinions on the why, nothing more, nothing less.

That is just crazy.
Losing one game, in overtime, in the semi final championship, on a literally last second shot, is not a "C". It's an "A".

 

[wallman]

Arike ALWAYS has only one thing on her mind. Arike is also a Junior and her teammates and Muffet have learned not to expect to get the ball back once it gets into her hands.

This is the one play I was scratching my head at with the limited time on the clock just crowd the heck out of her, she is never going to pass.

 

[hugefan]

Yes, Kia pancaked Mabrey. I am wondering if that goes back to the little kerfuffle between Pheesa, Kia & Mabrey in the regular season game at the XL center in December.

As for CD dragging Geno back to the bench, I’m sure she did it just last season, perhaps during the ND game? I think wrestling Geno back to the bench is part of CD’s job description.

Did you have a birds eye view? I did this was a typical dirtbag play by a player who did the same thing to Ionescu in the Oregon play. As Kia was cutting in a forward motion, the dirtbag player took a dive coming in from the side and was a complete set up by said dirtbag player.

 

[oldude]

Did you have a birds eye view? I did this was a typical dirtbag play by a player who did the same thing to Ionescu in the Oregon play. As Kia was cutting in a forward motion, the dirtbag player took a dive coming in from the side and was a complete set up by said dirtbag player.

Agree that Mabrey was trying to pick up a cheap foul on the play, which she did. My enjoyment was that Kia made sure it wasn’t a “ticky-tack” foul when she lowered her shoulder and flattened Mabrey.

 

[hugefan]

I know Oldude. It is just inexcusable, especially when this player has gotten away with all this crap and then we get called for being in correct defensive positioning.

 

[HopJim]

Each of the other 3 teams in the FF has a “go to” scorer who they can give the ball to in an isolation play who is capable of beating a defender off the dribble or pulling up for a jumper. (Vivians, Durr & Ogunbowle) UConn doesn’t quite have that player.

While I agree that UConn’s offense has never depended on one player, when the Huskies had DT & Maya in particular, whenever the offense broke down somewhat, as it did last year vs MS St’s tough man-to-man, or Friday against ND’s zone, which neutralized much of what UConn tries to do on offense, it is invaluable to have one or more players who can put the ball on the floor and score.

UConn has not had an offense that facilitated one on one play for several years. With one or more players typically at the post, floor is not spread and relatively easy to double on shooter.

 

[oldude]

UConn has not had an offense that facilitated one on one play for several years. With one or more players typically at the post, floor is not spread and relatively easy to double on shooter.

Agree with your first point but not the second. UConn spreads the floor and flashes multiple players through the post. Unless the other team is playing zone, like ND, they can’t just have their post sit in the paint.

If UConn had a player who could isolate, say at the top of the key, with 4 players spreading the floor, if another defender attempted to double the iso, the way the Huskies pass, you’re probably looking at a wide open jumper or layup.