| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11148
Back to top |
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63772
Back to top |
 Posted: 08/26/15 4:24 pm ::: |
Reply  |
|
Clay, it was Rutgers that lost Laney.
This is Duke's year. Can't you feel it?
_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
|
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7842
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/26/15 4:56 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Mississippi State is dangerous. Arizona State, I don't know. Maybe. Duke? I hope that was sarcasm, Shades.
_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
|
|
bballjunkie
Joined: 12 Aug 2014
Posts: 785
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/26/15 5:17 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
[quote="#Occasionalwnbafan"][quote="bballjunkie"]Not a bad top ten Clay. I think some are underestimating ND, not sure why but they have been proved wrong before, their returners are good enough to keep them there. After top ten it's a crap shoot and could be a lot of the usual suspects as experience can go a long way.[/quote]
Allen will really have to step her game up if ND is to make it past the Sweet 16 this year. Turner will get hers, but when teams start to game plan for her someone else will have to step up. Unlike years past Ogunbowale, Patberg, and Mabrey won't play with 2 elite/All Conference guards, Llyod had Diggins and K-Mac, Diggins had Barlow, Schrader, and Lechlitner. Michaela Mabrey will be depended on, but she hasn't been that dependable.[/quote]
I guess I should have added with McGraws coaching as that will be huge compared to the others. I also give Bruno credit as I think he is a good coach.
|
|
bballjunkie
Joined: 12 Aug 2014
Posts: 785
Back to top |
|
Nixtreefan
Joined: 14 Nov 2012
Posts: 2539
Back to top |
|
bekcat1
Joined: 24 Feb 2011
Posts: 874
Location: The ATL
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/26/15 6:28 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| bballjunkie wrote: |
| ClayK wrote: |
| bullsky wrote: |
| ClayK wrote: |
Dead Wrong in Public once again:
1. UConn
2. Notre Dame
3. Baylor
4. Texas
5. South Carolina
6. Florida State
7. Ohio State
8. Tennessee
9. Mississippi State
10. Arizona State
11. Duke
12. Louisville
13. Oregon State
14. Maryland
15. South Florida
16. Rutgers
17. Texas A&M
18. Kentucky
19. Florida Gulf Coast
20. Syracuse
21. Green Bay
22. James Madison
23. California
24. Northwestern
25. Chattanooga |
I'm not terribly familiar with either team but are Mississippi St and Arizona St really Top 10? I would switch them out for Maryland and Louisville, but that's just me.
Good list, though! Hoping DePaul can join Northwestern in the Top 25  |
I think Maryland's losses -- Laney and Brown -- are major, and I don't see immediate help at that level. Mississippi State and Arizona State both return almost everyone from very good teams, and I tend to give a lot of credit to continuity.
As for Louisville, does anyone remember that win over Baylor? I give Walz a lot of credit for postseason success ... something I also do for Muffet McGraw but I don't for McCallie. |
Really, one game? I think it was Slaughter got hot and Griner got some unfriendly calls. |
Mississippi State lost a LOT when Alwal graduated. I'm not sure they'll be top 10. I would maybe switch them with Oregon State.
Louisville is a fairly young team to me (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong). In the future I think they'll be rather stout, but maybe not so much this season.
With Baylor's OOC, I'm not sure how anyone can take them seriously until conference play starts. Their OOC is quite possibly the weakest I ever did see.
And Tennessee is better than 8th preseason. On paper they have one of the top 3 rosters in all of WCBB. If they can stay away from the injury bug, they'll be in the Final Four this season, and quite possibly run the regular season table and be undefeated going into the NCAAT.
|
|
linkster
Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5423
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/26/15 7:39 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| bekcat1 wrote: |
Mississippi State lost a LOT when Alwal graduated. I'm not sure they'll be top 10. I would maybe switch them with Oregon State.
Louisville is a fairly young team to me (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong). In the future I think they'll be rather stout, but maybe not so much this season.
With Baylor's OOC, I'm not sure how anyone can take them seriously until conference play starts. Their OOC is quite possibly the weakest I ever did see.
And Tennessee is better than 8th preseason. On paper they have one of the top 3 rosters in all of WCBB. If they can stay away from the injury bug, they'll be in the Final Four this season, and quite possibly run the regular season table and be undefeated going into the NCAAT. |
I agree with everything up to the last paragraph. I am amazed at how every year Tenn is declared a FF level team. As far as the preseason is concerned Tenn has been picked as a FF team in 4 of the last 5 years while Notre Dame has been picked in 2 of those years. In those same 5 years Tenn has failed to make the FF even once while Notre Dame has not only made it all 5 years but has played in the NC game in 4 of those 5 years. Roster be damned, it's all about the synergistics of the team, not a matchup of individuals.
Tenn's roster is being hyped because of DeShields and Russell, while the loss of three seniors who were a huge part of what success they have had for the last four years is being ignored.
DeShields had a very good freshman year at UNC, playing in an undisciplined offense where her individual skills were obvious. Russell, while OK as a freshman, didn't come close to living up to her HSPOY hype. Both players were said to have played with injuries. Well one of them is coming off major surgery to both feet while the other seems to be plagued with various leg problems, the latest being patella tendinitis.
If a post and a perimeter player are all it takes then tOSU should be ranked higher than Tenn since Hart and Mitchell's freshman stats overshadow anything the Tenn duo did. And yet no one gives tOSU any shot at a FF? Why?
Next year tOSU will be bolstered by Calhoun and Mavunga, 2 proven elite level players while Tenn has zero elite commitments from the 2016 class. I predict that tOSU will get to the FF before Tenn
|
|
Fighting Artichoke
Joined: 12 Dec 2012
Posts: 4040
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/26/15 8:01 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| linkster wrote: |
| bekcat1 wrote: |
Mississippi State lost a LOT when Alwal graduated. I'm not sure they'll be top 10. I would maybe switch them with Oregon State.
Louisville is a fairly young team to me (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong). In the future I think they'll be rather stout, but maybe not so much this season.
With Baylor's OOC, I'm not sure how anyone can take them seriously until conference play starts. Their OOC is quite possibly the weakest I ever did see.
And Tennessee is better than 8th preseason. On paper they have one of the top 3 rosters in all of WCBB. If they can stay away from the injury bug, they'll be in the Final Four this season, and quite possibly run the regular season table and be undefeated going into the NCAAT. |
I agree with everything up to the last paragraph. I am amazed at how every year Tenn is declared a FF level team. As far as the preseason is concerned Tenn has been picked as a FF team in 4 of the last 5 years while Notre Dame has been picked in 2 of those years. In those same 5 years Tenn has failed to make the FF even once while Notre Dame has not only made it all 5 years but has played in the NC game in 4 of those 5 years. Roster be damned, it's all about the synergistics of the team, not a matchup of individuals.
Tenn's roster is being hyped because of DeShields and Russell, while the loss of three seniors who were a huge part of what success they have had for the last four years is being ignored.
DeShields had a very good freshman year at UNC, playing in an undisciplined offense where her individual skills were obvious. Russell, while OK as a freshman, didn't come close to living up to her HSPOY hype. Both players were said to have played with injuries. Well one of them is coming off major surgery to both feet while the other seems to be plagued with various leg problems, the latest being patella tendinitis.
If a post and a perimeter player are all it takes then tOSU should be ranked higher than Tenn since Hart and Mitchell's freshman stats overshadow anything the Tenn duo did. And yet no one gives tOSU any shot at a FF? Why?
Next year tOSU will be bolstered by Calhoun and Mavunga, 2 proven elite level players while Tenn has zero elite commitments from the 2016 class. I predict that tOSU will get to the FF before Tenn |
I agree with most of what you said, Linkster, but I do not believe that Calhoun has proven anything. Her freshman year as truncated as it was by her early departure from Duke, did not prove she was elite level. In fact, I would argue that it lowered her stock.
|
|
Fighting Artichoke
Joined: 12 Dec 2012
Posts: 4040
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/26/15 8:07 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| bekcat1 wrote: |
| bballjunkie wrote: |
| ClayK wrote: |
| bullsky wrote: |
| ClayK wrote: |
Dead Wrong in Public once again:
1. UConn
2. Notre Dame
3. Baylor
4. Texas
5. South Carolina
6. Florida State
7. Ohio State
8. Tennessee
9. Mississippi State
10. Arizona State
11. Duke
12. Louisville
13. Oregon State
14. Maryland
15. South Florida
16. Rutgers
17. Texas A&M
18. Kentucky
19. Florida Gulf Coast
20. Syracuse
21. Green Bay
22. James Madison
23. California
24. Northwestern
25. Chattanooga |
I'm not terribly familiar with either team but are Mississippi St and Arizona St really Top 10? I would switch them out for Maryland and Louisville, but that's just me.
Good list, though! Hoping DePaul can join Northwestern in the Top 25 |
I think Maryland's losses -- Laney and Brown -- are major, and I don't see immediate help at that level. Mississippi State and Arizona State both return almost everyone from very good teams, and I tend to give a lot of credit to continuity.
As for Louisville, does anyone remember that win over Baylor? I give Walz a lot of credit for postseason success ... something I also do for Muffet McGraw but I don't for McCallie. |
Really, one game? I think it was Slaughter got hot and Griner got some unfriendly calls. |
Mississippi State lost a LOT when Alwal graduated. I'm not sure they'll be top 10. I would maybe switch them with Oregon State.
Louisville is a fairly young team to me (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong). In the future I think they'll be rather stout, but maybe not so much this season.
With Baylor's OOC, I'm not sure how anyone can take them seriously until conference play starts. Their OOC is quite possibly the weakest I ever did see.
And Tennessee is better than 8th preseason. On paper they have one of the top 3 rosters in all of WCBB. If they can stay away from the injury bug, they'll be in the Final Four this season, and quite possibly run the regular season table and be undefeated going into the NCAAT. |
Louisville is very young, as I posted earlier today (last post on page 1 of this thread). They have no seniors and only one junior who has never started a game and is coming off an injury. The only returning starters are sophomores Mariya Moore and Myisha Hones-Allen. Most likely they will start only sophomores and freshmen. Tough to win when your team is so very young.
And as Linkster pointed out, I think you are too optimistic when predicting Tennessee's success this season. While they have the talent to be a top 4 team, they have a recent history of not playing up to expectations, so we should probably take a wait and see approach. Of course as a fan one can always hope for the best!
|
|
PickledGinger
Joined: 04 Oct 2013
Posts: 1365
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/26/15 8:29 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| I am absolutely stupefied that almost none of you (I count 1 other besides me) think Oregon State will be a Top 10 team this year, and that most of you have another Pac-12 team finishing above them. NCAA Tournament performance not withstanding, this is essentially the same team that went 16-2 in-conference last season. They return 88% of their scoring, 93% of their rebounding, and 87% of their assists from that team, and, IMO, the best coach in the conference right now. Sorry Tara. Stanford, ASU and Cal (really, people?) all lost considerably more substantial pieces than they did. Having them below 15 (like most of you do) is just asinine. Someone please explain it to me, because I just don't get what you people are not seeing in this team.
|
|
linkster
Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5423
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/26/15 9:02 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| PickledGinger wrote: |
| I am absolutely stupefied that almost none of you (I count 1 other besides me) think Oregon State will be a Top 10 team this year, and that most of you have another Pac-12 team finishing above them. NCAA Tournament performance not withstanding, this is essentially the same team that went 16-2 in-conference last season. They return 88% of their scoring, 93% of their rebounding, and 87% of their assists from that team, and, IMO, the best coach in the conference right now. Sorry Tara. Stanford, ASU and Cal (really, people?) all lost considerably more substantial pieces than they did. Having them below 15 (like most of you do) is just asinine. Someone please explain it to me, because I just don't get what you people are not seeing in this team. |
I really enjoyed watching OSU last season. But down the stretch they seemed to fold up. Losing at home to Stanford, both Hamblin and Wiese played uninspired. Then they lost to Colorado. And finally, as a 3 seed, they got handled fairly easily by Gonzaga.
I guess my putting them at 22 had a lot to do with those 3 games. Earlier in the season they were very good. They move the ball a lot like UConn. Wiese scored, involved her teammates, played defense and rebounded. Hamblin wasn't the most mobile but her size made her a potent low post threat and a good rebounder. It seemed to me that they regressed when the competition got tougher and the games meant more.
They play a style not unlike UConn. I'll be rooting for them again this year.
|
|
NoDakSt
Joined: 26 Oct 2005
Posts: 4929
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/26/15 9:18 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| linkster wrote: |
| PickledGinger wrote: |
| I am absolutely stupefied that almost none of you (I count 1 other besides me) think Oregon State will be a Top 10 team this year, and that most of you have another Pac-12 team finishing above them. NCAA Tournament performance not withstanding, this is essentially the same team that went 16-2 in-conference last season. They return 88% of their scoring, 93% of their rebounding, and 87% of their assists from that team, and, IMO, the best coach in the conference right now. Sorry Tara. Stanford, ASU and Cal (really, people?) all lost considerably more substantial pieces than they did. Having them below 15 (like most of you do) is just asinine. Someone please explain it to me, because I just don't get what you people are not seeing in this team. |
I really enjoyed watching OSU last season. But down the stretch they seemed to fold up. Losing at home to Stanford, both Hamblin and Wiese played uninspired. Then they lost to Colorado. And finally, as a 3 seed, they got handled fairly easily by Gonzaga.
I guess my putting them at 22 had a lot to do with those 3 games. Earlier in the season they were very good. They move the ball a lot like UConn. Wiese scored, involved her teammates, played defense and rebounded. Hamblin wasn't the most mobile but her size made her a potent low post threat and a good rebounder. It seemed to me that they regressed when the competition got tougher and the games meant more.
They play a style not unlike UConn. I'll be rooting for them again this year. |
They're in Italy right now and, as with summer foreign trips they get the advantage of having 10 extra days of practice. I enjoy watching them as well and they're a veteran team. I see them taking Pac.
|
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7842
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/26/15 9:47 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| PickledGinger wrote: |
| I am absolutely stupefied that almost none of you (I count 1 other besides me) think Oregon State will be a Top 10 team this year, and that most of you have another Pac-12 team finishing above them. NCAA Tournament performance not withstanding, this is essentially the same team that went 16-2 in-conference last season. They return 88% of their scoring, 93% of their rebounding, and 87% of their assists from that team, and, IMO, the best coach in the conference right now. Sorry Tara. Stanford, ASU and Cal (really, people?) all lost considerably more substantial pieces than they did. Having them below 15 (like most of you do) is just asinine. Someone please explain it to me, because I just don't get what you people are not seeing in this team. |
I remain unimpressed by Hamblin. She has size, but her relative immobility makes her very stoppable. Sorry about that. Weise is good but she can't carry the team by herself. That's why.
_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
|
|
calbearman76
Joined: 02 Nov 2009
Posts: 5155
Location: Carson City
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/26/15 11:20 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| linkster wrote: |
| PickledGinger wrote: |
| I am absolutely stupefied that almost none of you (I count 1 other besides me) think Oregon State will be a Top 10 team this year, and that most of you have another Pac-12 team finishing above them. NCAA Tournament performance not withstanding, this is essentially the same team that went 16-2 in-conference last season. They return 88% of their scoring, 93% of their rebounding, and 87% of their assists from that team, and, IMO, the best coach in the conference right now. Sorry Tara. Stanford, ASU and Cal (really, people?) all lost considerably more substantial pieces than they did. Having them below 15 (like most of you do) is just asinine. Someone please explain it to me, because I just don't get what you people are not seeing in this team. |
I really enjoyed watching OSU last season. But down the stretch they seemed to fold up. Losing at home to Stanford, both Hamblin and Wiese played uninspired. Then they lost to Colorado. And finally, as a 3 seed, they got handled fairly easily by Gonzaga.
I guess my putting them at 22 had a lot to do with those 3 games. Earlier in the season they were very good. They move the ball a lot like UConn. Wiese scored, involved her teammates, played defense and rebounded. Hamblin wasn't the most mobile but her size made her a potent low post threat and a good rebounder. It seemed to me that they regressed when the competition got tougher and the games meant more.
They play a style not unlike UConn. I'll be rooting for them again this year. |
The Pac 12 is intriguing. I see Oregon St as a very good team, but I don't see them as top 10. Their conference record was aided significantly by avoiding the road trip to NorCal. Arizona St. also seems =like a top 20, but not a top 10 team.
As for California, I think they have the best potential upside, but they could struggle early if they can't find a point guard. I t doesn't help that they play at Louisville and Texas A&M in Las Vegas in November. But for all that think that the loss of Boyd and Gray will decimate them, Cal also has two players (Mikayla Cowling and Gabby Green) who started as freshmen last year, Courtney Range who was coming off an injury most of last year, and two year starter Mercedes Jefflo. If Anigwe can step in as center Cal will have the longest, most athletic team in the conference. I don't see them as top 10 at the start of the season (Clay's 23 seem about right), but I think they have the best chance of getting to at least the Elite 8.
Stanford and UCLA should also be top 25. If it weren't for their recent history I'd be even higher on the Bruins coming off their NIT win. Stanford is there because of their history, but I'm not really sure how they will do it. Add in Oregon, Colorado and USC as teams that could pull an upset or two. All in all, this should be a great year for the Pac 12.
|
|
LegoMyEggo
Joined: 02 Apr 2010
Posts: 284
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/27/15 8:24 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| I got to watch Oregon State's win at North Carolina last season and was pretty impressed by them. Maybe they can keep growing as a team and advance a bit deeper this year? Nice to see them with a strong program.
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/27/15 9:06 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| bekcat1 wrote: |
And Tennessee is better than 8th preseason. On paper they have one of the top 3 rosters in all of WCBB. If they can stay away from the injury bug, they'll be in the Final Four this season, and quite possibly run the regular season table and be undefeated going into the NCAAT. |
Wow. Deja vu all over again.
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/27/15 9:39 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| calbearman76 wrote: |
oo
The Pac 12 is intriguing. I see Oregon St as a very good team, but I don't see them as top 10. Their conference record was aided significantly by avoiding the road trip to NorCal. Arizona St. also seems =like a top 20, but not a top 10 team.
As for California, I think they have the best potential upside, but they could struggle early if they can't find a point guard. I t doesn't help that they play at Louisville and Texas A&M in Las Vegas in November. But for all that think that the loss of Boyd and Gray will decimate them, Cal also has two players (Mikayla Cowling and Gabby Green) who started as freshmen last year, Courtney Range who was coming off an injury most of last year, and two year starter Mercedes Jefflo. If Anigwe can step in as center Cal will have the longest, most athletic team in the conference. I don't see them as top 10 at the start of the season (Clay's 23 seem about right), but I think they have the best chance of getting to at least the Elite 8.
Stanford and UCLA should also be top 25. If it weren't for their recent history I'd be even higher on the Bruins coming off their NIT win. Stanford is there because of their history, but I'm not really sure how they will do it. Add in Oregon, Colorado and USC as teams that could pull an upset or two. All in all, this should be a great year for the Pac 12. |
The PAC likely will be intriguing and entertaining. Certainly the most wide open of the P5, or even of the top eight, conferences.
The question will be whether there is any team that can prove itself to be a national contender.
The UCLA soph class has a lot to prove that they deserved their considerable recruiting hype before they deserve any ranking.
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/27/15 9:47 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Fighting Artichoke wrote: |
Are you very familiar with Louisville? While they certainly have a ton of talent, it's all concentrated in the sophomore and freshman classes. They have no seniors and only 1 junior (who never averaged more than 3 points/game in her first 2 years). Thus they will almost certainly start only freshmen and sophomores. The only returning starters are sophomores Mariya Moore and Myisha Hines-Allen. They should struggle but the next two years should be amazing. See roster link below:
http://www.gocards.com/sports/w-baskbl/mtt/lou-w-baskbl-mtt.html |
Moore and Hines-Allen were the two best players on the team last year and they both return with a year of experience. And that freshman class is almost certainly more talented, and may well be better on day 1, than the people they lost. So it's a classic talent/experience proposition. They may have some early growing pains but I see them as a lower top 10 team and by March probably better than last year.
|
|
Nixtreefan
Joined: 14 Nov 2012
Posts: 2539
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/27/15 11:06 am ::: |
Reply |
|
PAC will be very interesting. OSU got the scouting treatment by the end of the year and their weaknesses were exposed. Cal is right that they benefitted from an easier conference schedule and quite frankly they were under the radar for other teams.
I think Graves will make some noise down the road but it will take him time to get the players he needs and he is already affecting OSU s recruiting as OR is a much more attractive place for 4 years than OSU. I think he will ascend to being the top coach in the PAC.
Not sure how UCLA will do, they definitely underperformed and after watching Canada, I don't think they have the right pieces yet, but hope Fields comes back with the same mindset as she had with Team Canada and shares the ball.
Cal needs a PG bad, for all the bad moments Boyd had, she also had moments where she was the only player who was willing to take teams on.
Stanford basically played without a post presence, or posts who had any IQ or ability to score without being hand fed the ball open under the basket and they even missed those shots. The hope is that Smith will actually be able to understand some offense and finish.
|
|
LegoMyEggo
Joined: 02 Apr 2010
Posts: 284
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/27/15 2:29 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Re: Stanford, what was interesting to me was watching Erica McCall in the World University Games, she was pretty impressive. Perhaps the 2nd best player on the team behind Aerial Powers (Michigan State). Will she be able to play like that this season?
Marta Sniezak is a junkyard dog. Can't really shoot it well, but attacks and distributes well. I can't see how Anna Wilson will ever beat her out.
|
|
patsweetpat
Joined: 14 Jul 2010
Posts: 2313
Location: Culver City, CA
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/28/15 3:31 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| summertime blues wrote: |
| PickledGinger wrote: |
| I am absolutely stupefied that almost none of you (I count 1 other besides me) think Oregon State will be a Top 10 team this year, and that most of you have another Pac-12 team finishing above them. NCAA Tournament performance not withstanding, this is essentially the same team that went 16-2 in-conference last season. They return 88% of their scoring, 93% of their rebounding, and 87% of their assists from that team, and, IMO, the best coach in the conference right now. Sorry Tara. Stanford, ASU and Cal (really, people?) all lost considerably more substantial pieces than they did. Having them below 15 (like most of you do) is just asinine. Someone please explain it to me, because I just don't get what you people are not seeing in this team. |
I remain unimpressed by Hamblin. She has size, but her relative immobility makes her very stoppable. Sorry about that. Weise is good but she can't carry the team by herself. That's why. |
Oregon State, as currently constituted, seems to live-and-die by the trey. Mostly it lives, but those few times when OSU goes cold [as it did last year against Stanford (21.4%) and Colorado (19.4%)], OSU really struggles to find points and is beatable.
Still, OSU is the only team in the conference to have 2 different players convert 70+ treys, and also the only team in the conference to have 4 different players convert 30+ treys. Unlike some teams (e.g., my Bruins) who may have just one or two perimeter shooters to defend, the Beavs have 3 or 4 of 'em running around at all times. It's soooo much harder to stop. And the reason the Beavs can get away with playing all those shooters (some of whose athleticism is, er, somewhat limited) without paying a heavy price on the defensive side is that Ruth Hamblin is standing under the basket, swatting the living pee out of everything: her BPG and her Block Rate are both tied for 6th in the nation.
OSU couldn't successfully field the shooter-heavy lineup it favors if the Beavs didn't have Hamblin as a rim protector. She makes that team go in a way that is kinda under-appreciated.
Last edited by patsweetpat on 08/28/15 3:45 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
patsweetpat
Joined: 14 Jul 2010
Posts: 2313
Location: Culver City, CA
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/28/15 3:44 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Nixtreefan wrote: |
| Not sure how UCLA will do, they definitely underperformed and after watching Canada, I don't think they have the right pieces yet, but hope Fields comes back with the same mindset as she had with Team Canada and shares the ball. |
I love my Bruins. I loooooove my Bruins. But I fear they don't have enough shooters. They're gonna defend, and they're gonna try mightily to capitalize on transition opportunities. But in the half-court set, opponents are gonna continue to do what they did last year: play a virtual box-and-one, with a single defender dogging Korver and the other four sagging into the box in order to clog the paint, obstruct dribble-drives, fill passing lanes and smother UCLA's athletic bigs. Without enough shooters to stretch the defense, points may be hard for the Bruins to acquire.
Sure hope to be wrong.
|
|
Nixtreefan
Joined: 14 Nov 2012
Posts: 2539
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/28/15 3:50 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Yep the bruins are easy to scout.
To beat OSU you put full court pressure on Wiese, she is their only real ball handler and struggles when fully pressured. They try to get into the half court so pressure really hurts them.
Our stretch 4 really worked against OSU as she shot way beyond the arc and it was difficult for them to guard. However if you are like the Bruins and have no shooters, you will have to get points off of pressure and turnovers. Hamblin is slow so she will not keep up.
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11148
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/29/15 11:20 am ::: |
Reply |
|
The metrics make it pretty clear: Don't worry about midrange jumpers because it's very hard -- especially in the women's game -- for a team to shoot them well enough to beat you.
If you protect the rim, you force teams to beat you with threes, all else being equal, and if a team only has one or two three-point shooters, it opens up two vulnerabilities: 1) the defense can focus on those two; and 2) if one or both is cold and/or hurt, the offense will stall.
The elite teams can often overwhelm inferior teams with size, athleticism and talent, but once the competition is more evenly matched, then it's critical to be able to stretch the floor.
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
|
|
Thought you would want some rolly eyes to make you feel better. Both players did not improve at Louisville, they came out the same as they went in and with the same bad habits. Neither are particularly good team players, they are very self centered and have shown to have some issues re work ethic for Shimmel and mental issues for McCoughtry.