[81alum]

Soem, we should not forget that we did beat Baylor with Griner, and we have beaten Connecticut twice in the last few years.  Both times we beat Connecticut (national semis and two years ago) it was not all that close, either.  The two most recent Connecticut wins were done with a different offense installed--the triangle--while this is the first year we largely left the triangle behind, on the theory that guards like Amber and Toni were much quicker than guards we have had in the past and we would do well to mix in a lot of pick-and-roll.

Here is a hypothesis, and I wonder what the rest of you think of it.  The new pick-and-roll plays simply do not work against a team with guards that are equally quick like Connecticut and South Carolina.  The triangle, on the other hand, does allow a less athletic team to compete with a more athletic team.  Passes go faster than the most athletic defender can move, and a series of accurate passes and cuts can outdo physical hustle.  In the past, the triangle sometimes worked well enough to defeat Connecticut (though certainly not always.)

The triangle's main weakness is that it requires enormous practice to develop it to a fine edge--it requires players at least a year to learn it well and longer to perfect it.  That level of focus on the triangle has been sacrificed this year as Tara has experimented with other offensive options.  As a result, we are not passing the ball as crisply and confidently as we used to, because we  have become more reliant on dribble-drives and dishes by Toni and Amber.  (I never used to see Stanford attempt a basket before several people had touched the ball, but that happened numerous times  on Saturday, with Toni or Amber trying to dribble to the basket and score--where they were collectively 2-18.)  When Toni and Amber face guards who can shut down their dribble-drives 8 out of 9 times, then we are stuck because we are not that good anymore at the old triangle.

[81alum]

Soem, we should not forget that we did beat Baylor with Griner, and we have beaten Connecticut twice in the last few years.  Both times we beat Connecticut (national semis and two years ago) it was not all that close, either.  The two most recent Connecticut wins were done with a different offense installed--the triangle--while this is the first year we largely left the triangle behind, on the theory that guards like Amber and Toni were much quicker than guards we have had in the past and we would do well to mix in a lot of pick-and-roll.

Here is a hypothesis, and I wonder what the rest of you think of it.  The new pick-and-roll plays simply do not work against a team with guards that are equally quick like Connecticut and South Carolina.  The triangle, on the other hand, does allow a less athletic team to compete with a more athletic team.  Passes go faster than the most athletic defender can move, and a series of accurate passes and cuts can outdo physical hustle.  In the past, the triangle sometimes worked well enough to defeat Connecticut (though certainly not always.)

The triangle's main weakness is that it requires enormous practice to develop it to a fine edge--it requires players at least a year to learn it well and longer to perfect it.  That level of focus on the triangle has been sacrificed this year as Tara has experimented with other offensive options.  As a result, we are not passing the ball as crisply and confidently as we used to, because we  have become more reliant on dribble-drives and dishes by Toni and Amber.  (I never used to see Stanford attempt a basket before several people had touched the ball, but that happened numerous times  on Saturday, with Toni or Amber trying to dribble to the basket and score--where they were collectively 2-18.)  When Toni and Amber face guards who can shut down their dribble-drives 8 out of 9 times, then we are stuck because we are not that good anymore at the old triangle.