Weak Bench Night

[sawxfan23]

Big P, no one wants to be the arbiter of what you post, though as dd reconstructed, I would hope the format you post it as would change a little.

I like to work off stats, something I got from long readings of Bill James. There are some posters here, and you are by no means the worst offender and can take that to heart, choose just to spout opinions with either little or limited facts and then get hurt and huffy when you question them about their remarks using numbers. And if you challenge them about the words in a thread title like "weak," they get a bit agitated and claim they are not denigrating the players because....., well, I guess just because. And as noted, some of us here have followed the Huskies for many years and we do know that Geno makes many comments about his players that would lead the newbies here into thinking that they are indeed "weak," though the vets here know that he doesn't really think that way about a Stewie last year, or she wouldn't be in the game.

There is no witch hunt here against you if you wish to criticize the Huskies on solid grounds, and if you say Bria couldn't get a block at a block party or that Stef shouldn't make a habit of shooting 3s, or that Kiah is maybe a little too foul prone, I'll gladly join that opinion. But opinions without good numbers behind them often tend to be of 0 importance.

Can you please stop taking the "weak" comment out of context? It was said {not by me mind you} in regards to a "weak night" or poor performance and was not an attack on any person or persons directly. Also you should practice what you preach about opinions. When your opinion is different than some of the posters{"moaners"}, then the coach, and finally the player themselves that tells me it is of 0 importance!

 

[DobbsRover2]

Um yeah, the paragraph breaks would really help. And I apologize if the act of using numbers to question the adjectives in a thread title seems to be an attack on anyone's integrity.

But numbers are important in the critical analysis for WCBB, and dragging ugly behavior that's done on the men's board is way beside the point, unless you just want to post over there. If you respect the UConn Husky WCBB players, you'll extend them the same type of statistics based analysis that the men get and not run to the "overprotective fans" cries that the 3/4 glass empty posters sometimes use on being questioned when they have opinions but little in the way of any facts.

 

[UcMiami]

I think in general and very pleasantly this board unlike most sports forums takes pride in being less bombastic and less harsh in criticizing not just Uconn players but all players. We recognize these are college kids/women and not professional ball players and that they are learning skills and systems for the first time. Occasionally someone will go off on a Diggins or Simmons but generally others usually jump in to defend that player against the harshest of criticism (less like with those that wear Orange, but ... history.)
What I personally respond to the most is when one or two games get turned into a blanket criticism of a player as if even DT or Maya didn't have a few off games. And I cut freshman a lot more slack and tend to defend them more strongly. Chong had a good game this last time out, and I do not expect her now to have a smooth progression forward, just like after the Baylor/Rutgers games I did not expect her to fade into oblivion. And while before this Cinci game Geno said he wanted more from the bench, he also had praise for Chong's second half against Temple during which she took no shots grabbed no rebounds had no assists and a single steal. So to follow that game with a thread titled weak bench after Geno had praised Chong's second half effort seemed a little odd.
And I find it odd that people feel they have a right to post opinions in variance to other opinions on the board, but are surprised and displeased that those opinions are then challenged. Everybody who has posted here more than a few times has posted a comment that has been roundly criticized by many other posters. That is what happens on every forum I have ever read. What does not happen is the sort of name calling and personal attacks on other posters, the hijacking of threads into vendetta type back and forth postings, and the really over the top criticism of players and coaches that happen elsewhere. And we have the moderators to thank for that.

 

[DobbsRover2]

Can you please stop taking the "weak" comment out of context? It was said {not by me mind you} in regards to a "weak night" or poor performance and was not an attack on any person or persons directly. Also you should practice what you preach about opinions. When your opinion is different than some of the posters{"moaners"}, then the coach, and finally the player themselves that tells me it is of 0 importance!

Again, sawxsie, please read all the parts of the thread that addressed the performance on the"night," and how it stacked up against other team's benches.

There are other threads that deal with the "strong bench" and how much better it did when a very weak Cinci team was leaving Saniya open to hit some bombs, chances that weren't as easily available against a much better Temple team. And there are some numbers for you to look at, though that might be asking too much since you clearly couldn't handle any in this thread. Context is important as there is a difference between playing against a top team like Baylor versus a decent team like Temple and versus a very weak team like Cinci. As noted analyses without facts-stats-numbers often do tend to be of 0 importance.

And for the hundredth time, if you wish to see every comment that Geno uses to prod his player to a higher level as his judgment that they are weak or disappointing, you can do that. Those who have followed the Huskies for many years know that he is always using the "she can't guard a chair" about an ex-Husky or "she hasn't learned how to play defense" as he has said about Stewie (of the 60 blocks) this year. Most of us take these comments with a grain of salt and the assurance that he is trying to get under their skin a bit, but you can take them all at face value about the low worth of their performance. As noted, if he felt that way, those players wouldnt be out there.

 

[doggydaddy]

Can you please stop taking the "weak" comment out of context? It was said {not by me mind you} in regards to a "weak night" or poor performance and was not an attack on any person or persons directly. Also you should practice what you preach about opinions. When your opinion is different than some of the posters{"moaners"}, then the coach, and finally the player themselves that tells me it is of 0 importance!

"Kiah couldn't hold onto the ball, Brianna couldn't stop fouling and Saniya can't stop not shooting. Seventeen minutes and Saniya did not take one shot. Unacceptable. Tierney comes in and hits a three on her first shot. Saniya needs to shoot or it's four on five. Yes, there are much better options right now."

There was a tone and there are many ways to criticize without being a jerk about it.

The OP stated that "Kiah lost the ball a couple of times, Brianna had a couple of bad fouls and Saniya needs to shoot more" without the "Unacceptable" tone and comparing a walk on to Chong was not necessary.

Sure, I am sometime overprotective about the players, but I thought this thread after the Temple game was just looking for a problem to bring up. The fact that Geno mentioned the bench should do better after what the OP called a weak performance doesn't validate anything. Certainly not the patting on the back posts that we now have to read as if the posters noticed something everyone else didn't.

 

[DobbsRover2]

Everybody who has posted here more than a few times has posted a comment that has been roundly criticized by many other posters.

Geesh, UcM, I'm sorry I challenged you long ago about whether the 2009 or 2002 team was better. You were right, whichever one you picked.

Yeah, it's always a little draining when the "I am right because I say so and stats be damned and you hurt my feelings" posters start migrating to the BY. I'm sure if Bria goes 1-6 from the arc in her next game and Geno makes a crack about it, some of these posters will be just complaining that Hartley needs to step up her outside shooting because she's shooting less than 35% on the year.

 

[Bigpetunia]

dragging ugly behavior that's done on the men's board is way beside the point, unless you just want to post over there.

You cannot help yourself, I suppose. This is "the thing" that you do. In my suggestion that there is, and it's just my opinion, a pervasive double-standard here, did I in any way condone any ugliness that might or might not exist on the men's board (actually, I've never visited), or suggest that I wished to participate there, or engage in any ugly attack on players (which I never have)? I like having my opinions challenged. I do not like having them deliberately misconstrued or restated in a manner that seeks misrepresentation.

 

[VAMike23]

Such a weak bench game against Temple. Brianna scored at a rate that would have given her 24 points if she had played 32 minutes. Kiah rebounded at a rate that would have given her 12 rebounds if she played 34 minutes. Saniya stole at a rate that would have given her 4 if she played 34 minutes. Heck, Tierney goes for 33 points if she plays 33 minutes.

But to you that's weak crap. That much I can read.

Extrapolating from a certain percentage to a bigger scenario is always a questionable conjecture since you cannot say that the conditions that lead to the bench's 80% FG shooting would have been the same if they just doubled their shots (maybe some of them would have been bad ill-advised shots), but they almost certainly would have scored more points if they took 10 shots instead of 5.

I'd say that extrapolating from most any statistical figure under the kind of conditions being discussed to a bigger scenario [sic] is often, though not always, a 'questionable conjecture.'

But--one of your posts is not like the other.

 

[sawxfan23]

Again, sawxsie, please read all the parts of the thread that addressed the performance on the"night," and how it stacked up against other team's benches.

There are other threads that deal with the "strong bench" and how much better it did when a very weak Cinci team was leaving Saniya open to hit some bombs, chances that weren't as easily available against a much better Temple team. And there are some numbers for you to look at, though that might be asking too much since you clearly couldn't handle any in this thread. Context is important as there is a difference between playing against a top team like Baylor versus a decent team like Temple and versus a very weak team like Cinci. As noted analyses without facts-stats-numbers often do tend to be of 0 importance.

And for the hundredth time, if you wish to see every comment that Geno uses to prod his player to a higher level as his judgment that they are weak or disappointing, you can do that. Those who have followed the Huskies for many years know that he is always using the "she can't guard a chair" about an ex-Husky or "she hasn't learned how to play defense" as he has said about Stewie (of the 60 blocks) this year. Most of us take these comments with a grain of salt and the assurance that he is trying to get under their skin a bit, but you can take them all at face value about the low worth of their performance. As noted, if he felt that way, those players wouldnt be out there.

First off what do other teams benches have to do with the tea in china? We were posting about a "weak night" for Uconn's bench and UConn's bench only. The thing about stats that you constantly bring up{and you should know being a disciple of Bill James} is that they can be manipulated to show whatever to want them to. The constantly bring up lack of playing time as the main factor that the bench didn't play well. I say that playing well earns playing time. You can have whatever stats you want and I will rely on the eyeball stat. I have been around this game for a long time and competed in it at a high level and I know a hell of a lot. You bring up Geno's comments then dismiss them but I ask you again what about the comments that Saniya herself made that mirrored the posts of the "moaners" like me?

 

[chrissaran]

DobbsRover 2 and doggydaddy, since you two seem to know so much, how can you disagree with a player's opinion of their own play? Answer that.