Vandy Takes Down TX

[bballnut90]

For the record, YTD Sarah averages 27.1 mpg while Blakes averages 34.1 mpg, basically 25% more. Even against ranked OOC teams Sarah didn’t play all that many minutes because UConn typically had the game in hand by the 4th qtr.

I agree that Strong's stats could be even more gaudy if she played the number of minutes that Blakes does, but your last statement is incorrect. Strong is logging close to full games (36.4 mpg) against teams in current top 25:
37 vs Tennessee
34 vs Iowa
40 vs Michigan
33 vs Ohio State
38 vs Louisville

USC was ranked when they played and Sarah played 32 minutes but she likely would've played more if not for picking up 2 fouls in the first half.

 

[oldude]

I agree that Strong's stats could be even more gaudy if she played the number of minutes that Blakes does, but your last statement is incorrect. Strong is logging close to full games (36.4 mpg) against teams in current top 25:
37 vs Tennessee
34 vs Iowa
40 vs Michigan
33 vs Ohio State
38 vs Louisville

USC was ranked when they played and Sarah played 32 minutes but she likely would've played more if not for picking up 2 fouls in the first half.

I appreciate the correction. If that’s so, then it stands to reason that Blakes got a lot more minutes against Vandy’s OOC schedule of cupcakes.

 

[NycUcWbbFan]

I agree that Strong's stats could be even more gaudy if she played the number of minutes that Blakes does

We can normalize minutes using per 40 minute stats. And using those, and advanced stats &1, Sarah clearly has the more impactful (per-possession/ per-minute) stats (vs. Mikayla).

&1 Here’s RAPM and BPM.

Sarah’s Stats:

Mikayla’s Stats:

 

[NycUcWbbFan]

You asked for this Cornell. I am not scared to debate this topic. I already have admitted sympathy for Geno for this year’s schedule. I know UConn got really unlucky with their schedule this year.

Best wins:

UCLA:
@ Michigan State
@ Michigan
Iowa
Maryland
@ Minnesota
@ Ohio State
N Tennessee
N Duke
N North Carolina
N Oklahoma

UConn:
Tennessee
N Iowa
N Ohio State
N Louisville
N Michigan

Three of UConn’s best wins are against big 10 teams that UCLA has also beaten. UCLA also has much better road wins than UConn. UConn really doesn’t have a marquee road win. I think USC is probably the best true road win.

Imagine if UCLA adds additional wins over Michigan, Iowa, and Illinois via the big 10 tournament.

The smart thing to do is to just get it over with and put UCLA number one now. Waiting a reveal or two will only be more controversial.

What the 12-member Committee does in S-Curve seeding is do a rolling hypothesis testing based on the overall body of work (using team sheets and other information).

Below is the body of work for UConn and UCLA. Some posters make it seem that UConn plays a much less competitive schedule than UCLA. UConn does not. UConn’s and UCLA’s schedules are fairly comparable.

• 1. UConn | Torvik Schedule
• 2. UCLA | Torvik Schedule

UCLA has a blemish (an 11-point loss to TX) vs undefeated UConn. They both won vs Michigan by 3 points — UConn in November and UCLA in February. UConn has more dominant wins than UCLA vs other common opponents (Iowa, Ohio State, TN).

• There is a reason to reject the hypothesis that UCLA is the #1 overall seed;
• There is no compelling reason to reject the hypothesis that UConn is the #1 overall seed.

 

[packwrap]

Agreed. Sarah strong does not play the fourth quarter in virtually all of the big east games and yet She probably leads in all major player win metrics. Blake’s is good but no one and I mean no one is a three level scorer, defender and rebounder as Sarah strong. Prove me wrong guys

This will come down to what kind of player the voters like better.

Strong is the unicorn, a current front court player with guard skills, quietly leading a perennial power to a #1 ranking.

Blakes is a very good combo guard, (Overlooked a bit is she plays both guard spots for Vandy) leading an historically awful team into the top 5.

This is the same model that brought Plum, Ionescu and Clark to prominence.

I'm a UConn fan, so I would pick Strong, but certainly Blakes and Vandy offer a compelling story. This debate will continue in 27 and 28.

 

[Gus Mahler]

This will come down to what kind of player the voters like better.

Strong is the unicorn, a current front court player with guard skills, quietly leading a perennial power to a #1 ranking.

Blakes is a very good combo guard, (Overlooked a bit is she plays both guard spots for Vandy) leading an historically awful team into the top 5.

This is the same model that brought Plum, Ionescu and Clark to prominence.

I'm a UConn fan, so I would pick Strong, but certainly Blakes and Vandy offer a compelling story. This debate will continue in 27 and 28.

Vanderbilt is not "an historically awful team." On the contrary, they are historically a very strong team. If you examined the wins and losses from somewhere in the 80s through Melanie Balcomb's third-to-last year, you would probably come up with a win-lost percentage in the all-time top 25. The program dropped off badly during Balcomb's final two years. I don't know why. Then, admittedly, the Stephanie White tenure was truly awful. Following that, Shea had to pick up the pieces and it took her a few years for things to get on track. She now has some size and a superstar to compete with and she's having success.

 

[packwrap]

😁 Guess it depends on definition of awful.

• Vandy has one final four in 1993.
• Has not yet won an SEC league title.
• Was not in the ncaa tourney between 2015 and 2024.

Shea and Blakes (and now Galvan) have had to do some heavy lifting.

A bit like Coach Cignetti elevating Indiana in the Big10 in football.

 

[visitingcock]

Vanderbilt is not "an historically awful team." On the contrary, they are historically a very strong team. If you examined the wins and losses from somewhere in the 80s through Melanie Balcomb's third-to-last year, you would probably come up with a win-lost percentage in the all-time top 25. The program dropped off badly during Balcomb's final two years. I don't know why. Then, admittedly, the Stephanie White tenure was truly awful. Following that, Shea had to pick up the pieces and it took her a few years for things to get on track. She now has some size and a superstar to compete with and she's having success.

😁 Guess it depends on definition of awful.

• Vandy has one final four in 1993.
• Has not yet won an SEC league title.
• Was not in the ncaa tourney between 2015 and 2024.

Shea and Blakes (and now Galvan) have had to do some heavy lifting.

A bit like Coach Cignetti elevating Indiana in the Big10 in football.

First, Let me say that, in general, UConn fans like the predominant posters here do not have an appreciation of what “awful” really is.

Vandy is not historically awful . Their history is better than probably 300 . I prefer to think of them as I think of my pre-Dawn Gamecocks. “MEDIOCRE.”

Yes, Vandy has only one excellent year of reaching the finals four but they have .five very good years during which they went to the elite 8. They were good during the 14 years they went to the Sweet Sixteen.many programs envy Bandy’s 30 tournament appearances.

They deserve the fav “Mediocre””

 

[DEFCONN1]

I’m changing my women’s basketball freshman player of the year from Aaliyah Chavez to Aubrey Galvan!

 

[LETTERL]

First, Let me say that, in general, UConn fans like the predominant posters here do not have an appreciation of what “awful” really is.

Vandy is not historically awful . Their history is better than probably 300 . I prefer to think of them as I think of my pre-Dawn Gamecocks. “MEDIOCRE.”

Yes, Vandy has only one excellent year of reaching the finals four but they have .five very good years during which they went to the elite 8. They were good during the 14 years they went to the Sweet Sixteen.many programs envy Bandy’s 30 tournament appearances.

They deserve the fav “Mediocre””

Vanderbilt has had a few waves of high-level success (Foster, Chancellor, Balcombe) and also periods when the program wasn't very successful. That happens to most programs, too; it's really hard to be on top year after year after year without experiencing a down period in between waves of higher-level play.