msf22b
Maestro
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 6,337
- Reaction Score
- 17,399
Ice, Eric, et al.
Consider this segment from the LA Times's Jack Smith
Have you ever noticed that in advance of the Super Bowl, or any great sports event, or any event whose outcome can't be predicted, like World War II, there are always experts who tell us exactly how it is going to come out, and why; and after the event, which doesn't happen to come out that way at all, they explain exactly why it turned out the way it did; their reasoning is no sounder than it was in the first instance, except that now it is Monday morning, and they are explaining the obvious.
It would be folly and illogical to attempt to reconstruct the 2nd half. Like a Symphony, it occurred, proceeding in time and cannot be de-constructed. Monday-morning quarterbacking is destained as a method of analysis and I will not attempt it here. Nevertheless, there are facts and statements of purpose and intent that are available to be scrutinized:
In the last two minutes of the first half, after a fairly uneventful two minutes in the game, MJ was involved in three offensive possessions, more or less consecutively. She scored the reverse, assisted KML, rebounded the final shot and hit one for two FT's. In addition her defense was aggressive and effective. I have been bombarded to a state of nausea with the mantra of how to procure playing time: if you perform in practice...yadda, yadda. Surely this principle must extend to games (although I have never heard it so expressed). She preformed, more than effectively, in a superior manner, why was she not rewarded with playing time?
A persuasive argument can be made that the second-half rally and demoralization of the Dukies really began with her three late plays, a hustle, athleticism and savvy that the tiring Duke kids could not match.
To digress for a moment: This issue is an individual one having nothing to do with the concept of mass substitutions which I always disdained as being a lazy carry-over from the Olympics with no clear application here unless...practices (to which we are not privy) demonstrated otherwise.
An interesting theory, floated by a member suggested that in the exuberance of the moment Geno forgot. Plausible, but isn't that what assistants are for?
I also note the concern of the effect on recruiting. For a smart kid, moments like these might play a role.
One more point: Geno and all coaches have to make hundreds of decisions, large and small every day and some of them will be mistakes; it's inevitable, goes with the territory. What makes him the venerated, championship winning, success that he is has to do with making far less mistakes than the next guy.
Consider this segment from the LA Times's Jack Smith
Have you ever noticed that in advance of the Super Bowl, or any great sports event, or any event whose outcome can't be predicted, like World War II, there are always experts who tell us exactly how it is going to come out, and why; and after the event, which doesn't happen to come out that way at all, they explain exactly why it turned out the way it did; their reasoning is no sounder than it was in the first instance, except that now it is Monday morning, and they are explaining the obvious.
It would be folly and illogical to attempt to reconstruct the 2nd half. Like a Symphony, it occurred, proceeding in time and cannot be de-constructed. Monday-morning quarterbacking is destained as a method of analysis and I will not attempt it here. Nevertheless, there are facts and statements of purpose and intent that are available to be scrutinized:
In the last two minutes of the first half, after a fairly uneventful two minutes in the game, MJ was involved in three offensive possessions, more or less consecutively. She scored the reverse, assisted KML, rebounded the final shot and hit one for two FT's. In addition her defense was aggressive and effective. I have been bombarded to a state of nausea with the mantra of how to procure playing time: if you perform in practice...yadda, yadda. Surely this principle must extend to games (although I have never heard it so expressed). She preformed, more than effectively, in a superior manner, why was she not rewarded with playing time?
A persuasive argument can be made that the second-half rally and demoralization of the Dukies really began with her three late plays, a hustle, athleticism and savvy that the tiring Duke kids could not match.
To digress for a moment: This issue is an individual one having nothing to do with the concept of mass substitutions which I always disdained as being a lazy carry-over from the Olympics with no clear application here unless...practices (to which we are not privy) demonstrated otherwise.
An interesting theory, floated by a member suggested that in the exuberance of the moment Geno forgot. Plausible, but isn't that what assistants are for?
I also note the concern of the effect on recruiting. For a smart kid, moments like these might play a role.
One more point: Geno and all coaches have to make hundreds of decisions, large and small every day and some of them will be mistakes; it's inevitable, goes with the territory. What makes him the venerated, championship winning, success that he is has to do with making far less mistakes than the next guy.
