What Not To Blame For Last Night's Loss

[TheObvious]

Yes, Uconn lost 78-67. Let's stripe aways non-causes. We did not lose because:

• Of injuries
• Geno is losing his touch in recruiting and strategy
• Coach works the players too hard
• Of turnovers
• UCLA out-rebounded us 44-36
• We're missing Dorka
• Of poor defense
• UCLA was too big
• etc.

At the risk of over-simplifying, we lost because we shot 33% and they made 46% of their baskets,
including a hot-12 from the 3-point line. Every Uconn player is capable of scoring 12 or more points, but with the exception of Paige, they didn't last night. Consider: We missed 66 shots! If just 5 of those had swished the net (two 3s and three 2s), we could have won.

The up side of all this is, the only way to go is up. Tonight we will make more than 1/3 of our shots and beat good Kansas team.

 

[Blond D.]

Yes, Uconn lost 78-67. Let's stripe aways non-causes. We did not lose because:

• Of injuries
• Geno is losing his touch in recruiting and strategy
• Coach works the players too hard
• Of turnovers
• UCLA out-rebounded us 44-36
• We're missing Dorka
• Of poor defense
• UCLA was too big
• etc.

At the risk of over-simplifying, we lost because we shot 33% and they made 46% of their baskets,
including a hot-12 from the 3-point line. Every Uconn player is capable of scoring 12 or more points, but with the exception of Paige, they didn't last night. Consider: We missed 66 shots! If just 5 of those had swished the net (two 3s and three 2s), we could have won.

The up side of all this is, the only way to go is up. Tonight we will make more than 1/3 of our shots and beat good Kansas team.

You are 100% right. It was our shooting % that did us in. Yeah we could and usually play better defense but our lack of buckets and UCLA's high percentage of 3's made is the difference.

 

[Cheddie]

Yes, Uconn lost 78-67. Let's stripe aways non-causes. We did not lose because:

• Of injuries
• Geno is losing his touch in recruiting and strategy
• Coach works the players too hard
• Of turnovers
• UCLA out-rebounded us 44-36
• We're missing Dorka
• Of poor defense
• UCLA was too big
• etc.

At the risk of over-simplifying, we lost because we shot 33% and they made 46% of their baskets,
including a hot-12 from the 3-point line. Every Uconn player is capable of scoring 12 or more points, but with the exception of Paige, they didn't last night. Consider: We missed 66 shots! If just 5 of those had swished the net (two 3s and three 2s), we could have won.

The up side of all this is, the only way to go is up. Tonight we will make more than 1/3 of our shots and beat good Kansas team.

It is probably difficult for even Geno to determine exactly why UConn lost, but I would strongly suggest that injuries were a factor. Perhaps the team would not have shot 33% if a healthy Azzi and Caroline were playing. Perhaps the team would not have been out-rebounded if Jana and Ayanna were similarly healthy and playing. Those four players would have provided Geno with an enormous boost in talent, and that would have clearly changed the potential for the way the game might have played out.

I don't think you can discount the mental aspect of playing while knowing that Azzi was lost and the season will be different that everyone expected one month ago.

You can blame the team that did suit up for bad shooting, poor defense, lack of rebounding, which were the causes of the loss given the available players.

 

[TCC Kid]

Yes, Uconn lost 78-67. Let's stripe aways non-causes. We did not lose because:

• Of injuries
• Geno is losing his touch in recruiting and strategy
• Coach works the players too hard
• Of turnovers
• UCLA out-rebounded us 44-36
• We're missing Dorka
• Of poor defense
• UCLA was too big
• etc.

At the risk of over-simplifying, we lost because we shot 33% and they made 46% of their baskets,
including a hot-12 from the 3-point line. Every Uconn player is capable of scoring 12 or more points, but with the exception of Paige, they didn't last night. Consider: We missed 66 shots! If just 5 of those had swished the net (two 3s and three 2s), we could have won.

The up side of all this is, the only way to go is up. Tonight we will make more than 1/3 of our shots and beat good Kansas team.

factors : 1. UCLA was a better team last evening --shall they be next time
2. Geno is losing it---in getting good 6-4, 6-4, 6-6 players
3. Injuries even if true is a cop-out
4. Position to position--UCLA was bigger, generally, quicker, and wow--better shooters
5. They pack our weakest point--the post and out rebounded well
With all the bad there is good. KK is the sunshine in a storm--#12--knows how to play--Ice had better moments--
My heart goes out to Edwards, Paige, Nika--if heart would win a game---this one would have been Uconn. I'm proud of this team they came back from 22 down--WOW!! If you ever say one player carry 1500 pound s that was Paige, carrying this team.

 

[TCC Kid]

You are 100% right. It was our shooting % that did us in. Yeah we could and usually play better defense but our lack of buckets and UCLA's high percentage of 3's made is the difference.

Hot DANG! Shooting percentage? Blame a well executed game plan. Bigger UCLA had an easy time stopping Edwards. I think their defense got into our 3 point shooters heads.
Azzi being out, not a issue. The score may have been closer with her.
Give credit where credit is due---With the UCLA coaching staff and their player. They were bigger, talented, and knew who and when to shut them down--Kudo's to UCLA..
I'm a UConn WBB fan--and I appreciate (cuz I've seen it for 30 years) very good offense and defense--UCLA had that.

 

[Bone Dog]

Too many new threads on the same topic. That said, I agree with you, @TheObvious, that it sometimes helps to identify a single factor or maybe two. Shooting is clearly a primary factor. On the other hand, everyone here knows that this factor did not occur in a vacuum. It was in turn caused and exacerbated by other factors, including:

• injuries (we lost two of our best perimeter shooters -- surely this is relevant to shooting woes, right?)
• Recruiting and strategy (because yes, the shooters felt the pressure of having to make up for UCLA's size
• turnovers [empty possessions impacts shooting and shooting opportunities]
• rebounding [belongs with recruiting and strategy]
• poor defense [we couldn't both pack the paint and challenge all the open 3s and 2s from their guards]
• UCLA was too big [belongs with Recruiting and Strategy]
• etc.

I can also sympathize with you in thinking that it's easy to get lost in the weeds of overly-subtle analyses of causes, and saying it was just a shooting problem does clear the mind. As fans this applies mainly to us. But if you think you're giving advice to Geno, it doesn't apply very well at all. The coaches and the players need to think in a more subtle way -- Geno can't just yell "Shoot better" at the players. He has to design offensive schemes, screens and motion, to get them good shots and open looks. And they have to have time to practice those schemes between games. And the fact is running offensive plays is a lot harder to do if you're overmatched in the post. It's also harder to do if your guards don't make shots (as I think you have in mind).

 

[Longtime fan]

You are 100% right. It was our shooting % that did us in. Yeah we could and usually play better defense but our lack of buckets and UCLA's high percentage of 3's made is the difference.

If you were able to see the game, however, you will also note that we had very few " good looks." UCLA played excellent defense. Most of Paige's shots had to be created by the best player in the country. No one else ( except KK ) could do that. And UCLA owned the paint. and we never got rebounds. One shot and go home. They had multiple tries. They were far better. They almost led by 30 points at late in the game.

 

[TCC Kid]

It is probably difficult for even Geno to determine exactly why UConn lost, but I would strongly suggest that injuries were a factor. Perhaps the team would not have shot 33% if a healthy Azzi and Caroline were playing. Perhaps the team would not have been out-rebounded if Jana and Ayanna were similarly healthy and playing. Those four players would have provided Geno with an enormous boost in talent, and that would have clearly changed the potential for the way the game might have played out.

I don't think you can discount the mental aspect of playing while knowing that Azzi was lost and the season will be different that everyone expected one month ago.

You can blame the team that did suit up for bad shooting, poor defense, lack of rebounding, which were the causes of the loss given the available players.

There have been times when that has been true but not last evening and UCLA.. The loss was all on UCLA. If Uconn had Stokes , Tina, Ono, and Dork with Paige--it would have been a win.

 

[Redux]

I'm a UConn WBB fan--and I appreciate (cuz I've seen it for 30 years) very good offense and defense--UCLA had that.

I frequently re-watch UConn games and sometimes after losses I find myself appreciating opponent's good basketball much more 2nd time around. "Enjoying" might be too strong a word but I do like good basketball, and my feeling right now is UCLA played very well indeed.

 

[Plebe]

So after intensive analysis, discussion and debate we have arrived at the surprising conclusion that we would have won if we had scored more points than the other team.

 

[pvdoggy]

factors : 1. UCLA was a better team last evening --shall they be next time
2. Geno is losing it---in getting good 6-4, 6-4, 6-6 players
3. Injuries even if true is a cop-out
4. Position to position--UCLA was bigger, generally, quicker, and wow--better shooters
5. They pack our weakest point--the post and out rebounded well

There is nothing IF about it. I suspect that if you take 4 players out of the rotation of pretty much any team, they would be in trouble, especially if some of those players are key to your offense.

 

[Classof87]

So after intensive analysis, discussion and debate we have arrived at the surprising conclusion that we would have won if we had scored more points than the other team.

now THAT is concise analysis, lol. well said.

 

[omshanti]

Why does there always have to be something or someone to blame a loss on? They lost to a better team last night. That’s it. why can’t that be the reason they lost. Shots didn’t fall, rebounds weren’t gathered in and free throws missed. UCLA played a better game last night. that‘s why they lost. Tonight will be interesting. looking forward to the game.

 

[EasyEd]

Shooting percentage has been an issue that I saw last season too. I've been spoiled by past teams shooting around 50% and holding opponents to 40% or less. Especially in the games we've lost those percentages have been reversed. The question is why? Our defense allowing for opponents higher shooting percentages? Lack of ball movement to get higher percentage shots on offense? The last culprit has been rebounding, and that results in more shot opportunities for the opponents which can negate otherwise good defense. I guess the real question is why are these weaknesses so much more evident than in the past and are they something that can be corrected before March?

 

[hoophuskee]

We lost because of injuries.

1-- Looking at the roster at this moment it's as though UCONN got 4 senior recruits, 2 non-descript impact type of recruits, and 4 freshmen recruits (calling Ice a frosh - and while all the 4 frosh appear to be terrific for long term - short term you can't rely on non-superstar freshmen). Too few recruits able to play between sr and freshman.

2-- UCONN's team was built around their #1 3pt shooter (Azzi) and #3 3pt shooter (Caroline) to be able to play and produce alongside the superstar - Paige and a/a Aaliyah. They lost what their offense was built on. The team was built on "outshooting" opponents not "out grinding" them. There was a reason why in one game this summer Geno had Azzi take about 30+ shots in an exhibition game.

3-- Just the presence of their outside shooting, once they showed it could be explosive, would open the paint up for backdoor cuts or dribble drives. So for example in this game you would never see Aaliyah score just 5 points. There was an expectation of excellent 3pt shooting. Everything works off of that just like other teams might work off their inside play or other teams their press etc.

4-- In big games Azzi was going to get at least 30 minutes from Azzi if healthy and Caroline at least 20. UCONN has lost 50 minutes in which Azzi would have been either #1 or #2 scorer and Caroline probable #4 scorer. and no telling how much they open things up for others. And we're supposed to ignore this?

So, unable to run their offense they had worked on all summer and practice, the opposing team doesn't have as much pressure to have to score, -- then ofc it is injury related.

 

[Cuango]

Well said! I agree with every word!!

 

[RedStickHusky]

NC State went to 7-0 today with an 18 point win over #3 Colorado; UCLA rested Betts for all but 5 minutes today in a 50 point win over Niagra. Sometimes you lose because the other team is good. That's why the call them "games".

 

[AzzisBraids]

I respect this post and the optimism but I dissent. I think there are various factors and any basketball game could be deduced to "make more shots" for either team. I'll take a different approach that I haven't heard yet.

This was a scouting issue. The scout on this UCLA team was abnormally off. UCLA rains three's, loves transition and plays inside and out. While UConn neutralizes Betts for the most part, UConn decided they would let UCLA beat them from the 3 point line and they did. They went under on screens on everyone not named Osbourne, most notably Rice, and she made them pay. They were instructed not to switch and instead hedge and that opened up the lane even more.

Whether to go over or under on specific players on screens, whether you crash the glass or send people back in transition, whether you trap guards or press, some of these details needed a bit more fine-tuning based on the opponent. The game plan UConn devised worked, shut down the posts, namely Betts. But the UCLA guards produced and beat them. Plain and simple.

 

[JoePgh]

As always, a good look at the box score is a useful and important way to double-check the raw impressions (influenced by one's emotions as a fan) that one gets from simply watching the game. Let me use @Longtime fan 's post above as an example, although @TCC Kid and others said many of the same things.

If you were able to see the game, however, you will also note that we had very few " good looks." UCLA played excellent defense. Most of Paige's shots had to be created by the best player in the country. No one else ( except KK ) could do that. And UCLA owned the paint. and we never got rebounds. One shot and go home. They had multiple tries. They were far better. They almost led by 30 points at late in the game.

"UCLA owned the paint, and we never got rebounds." Umm, no. The box score says UCLA led in second-chance points by 14-12, and in points in the paint by 24-20. Neither of these are lopsided balances. Moreover (and more directly refuting the quoted statement), UConn actually got more offensive rebounds than UCLA by a margin of 15-12. It's true that UCLA got a lot more defensive rebounds, but that is the effect rather than the cause of UConn's poor shooting percentage.

"We had very few 'good looks'." I can't cite the box score on this, but in watching the game, I thought that Aaliyah (who went 2-for-12) had mostly open looks on the midrange jump shots that she missed, and Ice also had clear looks but went 0-for-5. Now, it may be true that both players (especially Aaliyah) had to expend so much energy on defense in the post that they suffered from fatigue when they took shots, and that may be why their percentage was low.

@Bone Dog and others mention turnovers. Again, check the box score: UCLA had 16 turnovers to UConn's 9, and UConn got 17 points off turnovers vs. UCLA's 10. Turnovers were an area where UConn's performance in the game was exemplary.

I actually agree almost completely with the @AzzisBraids post (immediately above) about what caused the loss. UConn was not dominated in the paint or on the boards (see above stats), but they did appear to focus on interior defense and had the attitude of "Let their guards beat us from the perimeter". And UCLA's guards did exactly that. You can say that indicates poor perimeter defense by UConn, but really UConn had to pick its poison, and that's the one they picked. I'm sure Geno didn't think that UCLA was likely to take 25 3-point shots and make 12 of them, but he probably would have told us before the game that if they did that, they would win.

Still, if Aaliyah in particular makes a normal percentage of her open midrange jump shots (maybe 6-for-12 instead of 2-for-12), that would be 8 more UConn points, and they only lost by 11.

UCLA was the better team last night, and they are a strong contender for the National Championship. They deserve their #2 ranking. UConn "should" have lost to them based on comparative ranking, so I don't think the loss should cause a major write-down in UConn's ranking next week.

 

[uconnfan68]

I respect this post and the optimism but I dissent. I think there are various factors and any basketball game could be deduced to "make more shots" for either team. I'll take a different approach that I haven't heard yet.

This was a scouting issue. The scout on this UCLA team was abnormally off. UCLA rains three's, loves transition and plays inside and out. While UConn neutralizes Betts for the most part, UConn decided they would let UCLA beat them from the 3 point line and they did. They went under on screens on everyone not named Osbourne, most notably Rice, and she made them pay. They were instructed not to switch and instead hedge and that opened up the lane even more.

Whether to go over or under on specific players on screens, whether you crash the glass or send people back in transition, whether you trap guards or press, some of these details needed a bit more fine-tuning based on the opponent. The game plan UConn devised worked, shut down the posts, namely Betts. But the UCLA guards produced and beat them. Plain and simple.

They clearly made decisions that they thought were the right ones. I’m sure they knew it could backfire. Not adjusting is the crime.

 

[Skeets]

They clearly made decisions that they thought were the right ones. I’m sure they knew it could backfire. Not adjusting is the crime.

I'd like to expand on that a little. This is a generalization, not about a specific game or player. Too often a good player, let's say averages ~10 points per game, goes up against UConn and has 14 or 16 points at half time. It's obvious the player is enroute to a career game. Adjustments are needed. If not on the fly, certainly during half time. Too often if adjustments are made then they are ineffective. So yes, the lack of effective adjusting is the crime.

 

[JBK]

Yes, Uconn lost 78-67. Let's stripe aways non-causes. We did not lose because:

• Of injuries
• Geno is losing his touch in recruiting and strategy
• Coach works the players too hard
• Of turnovers
• UCLA out-rebounded us 44-36
• We're missing Dorka
• Of poor defense
• UCLA was too big
• etc.

At the risk of over-simplifying, we lost because we shot 33% and they made 46% of their baskets,
including a hot-12 from the 3-point line. Every Uconn player is capable of scoring 12 or more points, but with the exception of Paige, they didn't last night. Consider: We missed 66 shots! If just 5 of those had swished the net (two 3s and three 2s), we could have won.

The up side of all this is, the only way to go is up. Tonight we will make more than 1/3 of our shots and beat good Kansas team.

Agreed.
It is also players coming in and out and we are not flowing on offense. Geno is looking for an Azzi replacement and the offense has stalled. Princeton and Carla lost to UCLA by 3, but their offense runs like a machine with much less talented players.
My recommendation would be to get Nika, Aubrey and KK applying more full court pressure and getting the team in transition. The defenses are cheating on UCONN predicable offense and is leading to one shot and done way too often. I am afraid Texas will beat up Paige and we have no other player that is comfortable with perimeter shooting right now.
Was hoping for Q —

As always, a good look at the box score is a useful and important way to double-check the raw impressions (influenced by one's emotions as a fan) that one gets from simply watching the game. Let me use @Longtime fan 's post above as an example, although @TCC Kid and others said many of the same things.


"UCLA owned the paint, and we never got rebounds." Umm, no. The box score says UCLA led in second-chance points by 14-12, and in points in the paint by 24-20. Neither of these are lopsided balances. Moreover (and more directly refuting the quoted statement), UConn actually got more offensive rebounds than UCLA by a margin of 15-12. It's true that UCLA got a lot more defensive rebounds, but that is the effect rather than the cause of UConn's poor shooting percentage.

"We had very few 'good looks'." I can't cite the box score on this, but in watching the game, I thought that Aaliyah (who went 2-for-12) had mostly open looks on the midrange jump shots that she missed, and Ice also had clear looks but went 0-for-5. Now, it may be true that both players (especially Aaliyah) had to expend so much energy on defense in the post that they suffered from fatigue when they took shots, and that may be why their percentage was low.

@Bone Dog and others mention turnovers. Again, check the box score: UCLA had 16 turnovers to UConn's 9, and UConn got 17 points off turnovers vs. UCLA's 10. Turnovers were an area where UConn's performance in the game was exemplary.

I actually agree almost completely with the @AzzisBraids post (immediately above) about what caused the loss. UConn was not dominated in the paint or on the boards (see above stats), but they did appear to focus on interior defense and had the attitude of "Let their guards beat us from the perimeter". And UCLA's guards did exactly that. You can say that indicates poor perimeter defense by UConn, but really UConn had to pick its poison, and that's the one they picked. I'm sure Geno didn't think that UCLA was likely to take 25 3-point shots and make 12 of them, but he probably would have told us before the game that if they did that, they would win.

Still, if Aaliyah in particular makes a normal percentage of her open midrange jump shots (maybe 6-for-12 instead of 2-for-12), that would be 8 more UConn points, and they only lost by 11.

UCLA was the better team last night, and they are a strong contender for the National Championship. They deserve their #2 ranking. UConn "should" have lost to them based on comparative ranking, so I don't think the loss should cause a major write-down in UConn's ranking next week.

Agree.
I watched the Princeton game vs UCLA and it was a 3 point loss and they were winning throughout the game. They do not have top 25 players - but play really tough defense and run a great offense. We need to adjust the offense a bit to match the players on the floor
With Nika - Aubrey and KK - we need to play more uptempo and get them in the open court.
AE could have beat their bigs up the court every time - but we cannot get in transition . We are letting the good competition set the tempo - AE is in the lane against 6’7 and guards that cheat on our not shooting guards.
Very difficult.
She is turning it over because it is too crowded. The same happened last year. Kansas may not make the tournament again this year and we could not knock them out.
Texas will be very tough on us and they will smother Paige with a fast - tough - athletic kid. Who will step up. ???

 

[RedStickHusky]

Geno spent four months putting together a team of three outstanding wing shooters and an undersized but skilled post. He said they should be shooting 20 threes a game. Do you realize how much harder things are for AE when the absence of Azzi and Caroline allows teams to park five defenders in the lane? And Geno's supposed to turn them into Princeton in a day? The facts are 1) Injury was absolutely a factor in the UCLA loss; 2) as were turnovers and rebounding; and 3) the world doesn't end with two early season OOC losses to a legit final four contender and a probable final 8 team. Our freshmen will get better, Ayana will return and Geno will rescheme for what he has rather than what he expected to have. It just doesn't happen in a week.

 

[Cuango]

Agreed! For all the doom & gloom on this board, some coming from your’s truly, the single biggest factor in our struggles remains the injuries we have suffered over the past three years! The effect of these injuries goes far beyond the physical absence of the affected players! They, the injuries also affect the overall psyche of the team. Players are forced into positions they are not ready for, they may begin to feel a sense of hopelessness, and the (understandable imo) feeling that the Sword of Damocles is suspended above their head! This team deserves not only our support but also our admiration for their continued effort and perseverance throughout this nightmare! Kudos also to Geno and his staff in continually being able to get this team, with very rare exceptions, to play hard every game! “This too shall pass” and while we may never again dominate the game as we once did, I’m confident we will not ever have to be ashamed of this team’s effort or conduct on or off the court! I agree with some of the other posters that the “bigs” thing has been grossly exaggerated. Not the effect so much but rather the recruiting “shortfalls”! There simply are not very many superstar bigs to be had!

 

[RedStickHusky]

Yeah, we seem to have a lot of folks around who are fans of winning more than anything else. That's fine, you do you. Personally, I like the journey and the narrative. A season presents a much better story arc with a few obstacles to overcome.