01-24-2014, 11:43 PM
We win, after a close first half. I didn't get to see it, so I am looking forward to the write-up.
BC
BC
WBB against UCLA
We win, after a close first half. I didn't get to see it, so I am looking forward to the write-up.
BC
BC
01-24-2014, 11:52 PM
Overview:
UCLA fronted Chiney and played an aggressive player defense on the perimeter [Edit: match-up 2-3 zone at times] to keep our offense in check in the first half. They collected 16 O-boards and forced 16 turnovers to neutralize our superior shooting. In the second half, we simply wore them down, and their 8 healthy players could not keep up the intensity, and we pulled away from a one point lead at halftime to a 17 point win.
Flow of the game:
The atmosphere was quite good--4400 and a lot of loud kids made the place feel more full than usual and somewhat raucous. Three young boys sang the national anthem and nearly brought the house down.Â
Tara started her usual five, and a couple of threes helped us take an early lead. But then something odd happened. UCLA caught up, and stayed with us, with 14 lead changes along the way.
Cori Close knows how to defend Chiney better than any other coach in the country, as her team's performance in the Pac 12 finals last year showed. Tonight the game began much the same way. UCLA played a very close player defense on the perimeter, which made it hard to pass. It was one of those games where almost every pass had to be preceeded by a dribble. The close defense also took away many of our three point opportunities.
Inside they often fronted Chiney, meaning that the only way to get a pass to her was to lob it over the defender. I think I saw that work once all night, and when we tried it often resulted in a turnover. At other times they simply shoved and pushed her out of the paint. The defense certainly shook Chiney's early performance. She missed 4 of her first 5 shots.
UCLA's shooting was not particularly good (33%) but they got more O-boards than we did and forced 16 turnovers while committing only 6. That gave them 73 shots compared with our 58--or 15 more chances than we had. They did not have to shoot particularly well to play us close.
At one point, a UCLA player lowered her shoulder and absolutely creamed poor Karlie, who flew to the floor with a sickening thud heard throughout Maples. People shouted with fear and anger for her. Karlie got stuck with the foul, but the good news is that she came back into the game in the second half, so the dreaded concussion seems not to have materialized. This was just one of quite a number of poor calls made. Â
In the second half Sara James opened with 2 consecutive treys and we got a little distance. Even so, UCLA kept within a single digit deep in the game. We did not go up by more than 9 until there were only 7 minutes left. At that point UCLA just seemed to fade while we built a lead.
Before the game, Kate mentioned that UCLA had only 8 players and so we would try to run on them--presumably to exhaust them. I think the strategy may have worked, since UCLA seemed to falter only at the end of the game.
Performances:
Chiney really looked like she was going to be held far short of her averages, and when she picked up her third foul in the second half and had to sit, I was certain of it. But she ultimately got back in the game and chipped away and got 21--a little off pace for the all time scoring record but still a superb performance. Inexplicably, she took only 2 free throws, which in my view reflects very poor officiating. It is easy to push her out of the paint if fouls are never called for doing so.
Erica McCall looked better than she has looked all season. She would up with 12 points on 6/8 shooting. More important, she had 8 rebounds and at times looked like the only player who could snag the rebounds at all. She also had an assist and a block within 17 minutes.
Lili Thompson continues to look absolutely superb. She seemed to be equally comfortable slashing to the basket--and picking up layups and fouls--or accurately shooting the three.Â
Amber picked up two fouls and this gave Lili a chance to play point and Sara a chance to play 16 minutes. Sara was very solid, going 3/3 from three point range. Amber again was quiet offensively, although she had some superb assists, with another amazing 8 assist to 1 turnover ratio.Â
Prior to the game someone asked Kate why Sara was not getting more minutes given that she was starting. Her answer was the standard non-answer you would expect to hear--hard to find time for all the excellent players, every night match ups are different, whoever is performing best, etc. But she said one thing that I thought was a bit revealing and may indicate why Sara continues to start. She said "Sara has a lot in the bank" and referred to her fine work last season. I think that is her way of saying that she is a senior, has made important contributions to the team in the past, and so she deserves the honor of starting even if other players get more time than she does.Â
Parting Thoughts
This game is somewhat concerning. I had thought that UCLA should have been more badly over matched. My biggest positive from this game is the play of Erica McCall, who played with more confidence, scored more points, grabbed more rebounds, and seemed more at home in the system. I wonder, however, what happened to Kailee, who did not seem to play.Â
Edit: In reviewing the points scored by half, we scored exactly 36 in each half, but UCLA dropped from 35 in the first half to 20 in the second, with their FG% dropping from 40 to 26. Did we make halftime adjustments that tightened up, or was UCLA just playing at an unsustainable level in the first half, given their lack of depth?
Edit:Â I hate what TV does to game scheduling, and many fans were grumbling about the late start, about having the team on the road for two weeks in a row, and especially about a Monday dinner time game instead of the Sunday afternoon time we are used to.Â
Edit: We played only 9 players tonight--not the 14 or 15 we have been seeing in more lopsided games recently. No Alex, no Kailee (did not dress), no Tess, no Jasmine, no Erica Payne, no Briana. Are we beginning to see an end-of-the-season rotation forming? I was particularly curious not to see Alex given the temporary depletion to our guards, and I wonder what has happened to Jasmine ever since her injury, given that she was the brightest star against UConn in her frosh year.
UCLA fronted Chiney and played an aggressive player defense on the perimeter [Edit: match-up 2-3 zone at times] to keep our offense in check in the first half. They collected 16 O-boards and forced 16 turnovers to neutralize our superior shooting. In the second half, we simply wore them down, and their 8 healthy players could not keep up the intensity, and we pulled away from a one point lead at halftime to a 17 point win.
Flow of the game:
The atmosphere was quite good--4400 and a lot of loud kids made the place feel more full than usual and somewhat raucous. Three young boys sang the national anthem and nearly brought the house down.Â
Tara started her usual five, and a couple of threes helped us take an early lead. But then something odd happened. UCLA caught up, and stayed with us, with 14 lead changes along the way.
Cori Close knows how to defend Chiney better than any other coach in the country, as her team's performance in the Pac 12 finals last year showed. Tonight the game began much the same way. UCLA played a very close player defense on the perimeter, which made it hard to pass. It was one of those games where almost every pass had to be preceeded by a dribble. The close defense also took away many of our three point opportunities.
Inside they often fronted Chiney, meaning that the only way to get a pass to her was to lob it over the defender. I think I saw that work once all night, and when we tried it often resulted in a turnover. At other times they simply shoved and pushed her out of the paint. The defense certainly shook Chiney's early performance. She missed 4 of her first 5 shots.
UCLA's shooting was not particularly good (33%) but they got more O-boards than we did and forced 16 turnovers while committing only 6. That gave them 73 shots compared with our 58--or 15 more chances than we had. They did not have to shoot particularly well to play us close.
At one point, a UCLA player lowered her shoulder and absolutely creamed poor Karlie, who flew to the floor with a sickening thud heard throughout Maples. People shouted with fear and anger for her. Karlie got stuck with the foul, but the good news is that she came back into the game in the second half, so the dreaded concussion seems not to have materialized. This was just one of quite a number of poor calls made. Â
In the second half Sara James opened with 2 consecutive treys and we got a little distance. Even so, UCLA kept within a single digit deep in the game. We did not go up by more than 9 until there were only 7 minutes left. At that point UCLA just seemed to fade while we built a lead.
Before the game, Kate mentioned that UCLA had only 8 players and so we would try to run on them--presumably to exhaust them. I think the strategy may have worked, since UCLA seemed to falter only at the end of the game.
Performances:
Chiney really looked like she was going to be held far short of her averages, and when she picked up her third foul in the second half and had to sit, I was certain of it. But she ultimately got back in the game and chipped away and got 21--a little off pace for the all time scoring record but still a superb performance. Inexplicably, she took only 2 free throws, which in my view reflects very poor officiating. It is easy to push her out of the paint if fouls are never called for doing so.
Erica McCall looked better than she has looked all season. She would up with 12 points on 6/8 shooting. More important, she had 8 rebounds and at times looked like the only player who could snag the rebounds at all. She also had an assist and a block within 17 minutes.
Lili Thompson continues to look absolutely superb. She seemed to be equally comfortable slashing to the basket--and picking up layups and fouls--or accurately shooting the three.Â
Amber picked up two fouls and this gave Lili a chance to play point and Sara a chance to play 16 minutes. Sara was very solid, going 3/3 from three point range. Amber again was quiet offensively, although she had some superb assists, with another amazing 8 assist to 1 turnover ratio.Â
Prior to the game someone asked Kate why Sara was not getting more minutes given that she was starting. Her answer was the standard non-answer you would expect to hear--hard to find time for all the excellent players, every night match ups are different, whoever is performing best, etc. But she said one thing that I thought was a bit revealing and may indicate why Sara continues to start. She said "Sara has a lot in the bank" and referred to her fine work last season. I think that is her way of saying that she is a senior, has made important contributions to the team in the past, and so she deserves the honor of starting even if other players get more time than she does.Â
Parting Thoughts
This game is somewhat concerning. I had thought that UCLA should have been more badly over matched. My biggest positive from this game is the play of Erica McCall, who played with more confidence, scored more points, grabbed more rebounds, and seemed more at home in the system. I wonder, however, what happened to Kailee, who did not seem to play.Â
Edit: In reviewing the points scored by half, we scored exactly 36 in each half, but UCLA dropped from 35 in the first half to 20 in the second, with their FG% dropping from 40 to 26. Did we make halftime adjustments that tightened up, or was UCLA just playing at an unsustainable level in the first half, given their lack of depth?
Edit:Â I hate what TV does to game scheduling, and many fans were grumbling about the late start, about having the team on the road for two weeks in a row, and especially about a Monday dinner time game instead of the Sunday afternoon time we are used to.Â
Edit: We played only 9 players tonight--not the 14 or 15 we have been seeing in more lopsided games recently. No Alex, no Kailee (did not dress), no Tess, no Jasmine, no Erica Payne, no Briana. Are we beginning to see an end-of-the-season rotation forming? I was particularly curious not to see Alex given the temporary depletion to our guards, and I wonder what has happened to Jasmine ever since her injury, given that she was the brightest star against UConn in her frosh year.
Overview:
UCLA fronted Chiney and played an aggressive player defense on the perimeter [Edit: match-up 2-3 zone at times] to keep our offense in check in the first half. They collected 16 O-boards and forced 16 turnovers to neutralize our superior shooting. In the second half, we simply wore them down, and their 8 healthy players could not keep up the intensity, and we pulled away from a one point lead at halftime to a 17 point win.
Flow of the game:
The atmosphere was quite good--4400 and a lot of loud kids made the place feel more full than usual and somewhat raucous. Three young boys sang the national anthem and nearly brought the house down.Â
Tara started her usual five, and a couple of threes helped us take an early lead. But then something odd happened. UCLA caught up, and stayed with us, with 14 lead changes along the way.
Cori Close knows how to defend Chiney better than any other coach in the country, as her team's performance in the Pac 12 finals last year showed. Tonight the game began much the same way. UCLA played a very close player defense on the perimeter, which made it hard to pass. It was one of those games where almost every pass had to be preceeded by a dribble. The close defense also took away many of our three point opportunities.
Inside they often fronted Chiney, meaning that the only way to get a pass to her was to lob it over the defender. I think I saw that work once all night, and when we tried it often resulted in a turnover. At other times they simply shoved and pushed her out of the paint. The defense certainly shook Chiney's early performance. She missed 4 of her first 5 shots.
UCLA's shooting was not particularly good (33%) but they got more O-boards than we did and forced 16 turnovers while committing only 6. That gave them 73 shots compared with our 58--or 15 more chances than we had. They did not have to shoot particularly well to play us close.
At one point, a UCLA player lowered her shoulder and absolutely creamed poor Karlie, who flew to the floor with a sickening thud heard throughout Maples. People shouted with fear and anger for her. Karlie got stuck with the foul, but the good news is that she came back into the game in the second half, so the dreaded concussion seems not to have materialized. This was just one of quite a number of poor calls made. Â
In the second half Sara James opened with 2 consecutive treys and we got a little distance. Even so, UCLA kept within a single digit deep in the game. We did not go up by more than 9 until there were only 7 minutes left. At that point UCLA just seemed to fade while we built a lead.
Before the game, Kate mentioned that UCLA had only 8 players and so we would try to run on them--presumably to exhaust them. I think the strategy may have worked, since UCLA seemed to falter only at the end of the game.
Performances:
Chiney really looked like she was going to be held far short of her averages, and when she picked up her third foul in the second half and had to sit, I was certain of it. But she ultimately got back in the game and chipped away and got 21--a little off pace for the all time scoring record but still a superb performance. Inexplicably, she took only 2 free throws, which in my view reflects very poor officiating. It is easy to push her out of the paint if fouls are never called for doing so.
Erica McCall looked better than she has looked all season. She would up with 12 points on 6/8 shooting. More important, she had 8 rebounds and at times looked like the only player who could snag the rebounds at all. She also had an assist and a block within 17 minutes.
Lili Thompson continues to look absolutely superb. She seemed to be equally comfortable slashing to the basket--and picking up layups and fouls--or accurately shooting the three.Â
Amber picked up two fouls and this gave Lili a chance to play point and Sara a chance to play 16 minutes. Sara was very solid, going 3/3 from three point range. Amber again was quiet offensively, although she had some superb assists, with another amazing 8 assist to 1 turnover ratio.Â
Prior to the game someone asked Kate why Sara was not getting more minutes given that she was starting. Her answer was the standard non-answer you would expect to hear--hard to find time for all the excellent players, every night match ups are different, whoever is performing best, etc. But she said one thing that I thought was a bit revealing and may indicate why Sara continues to start. She said "Sara has a lot in the bank" and referred to her fine work last season. I think that is her way of saying that she is a senior, has made important contributions to the team in the past, and so she deserves the honor of starting even if other players get more time than she does.Â
Parting Thoughts
This game is somewhat concerning. I had thought that UCLA should have been more badly over matched. My biggest positive from this game is the play of Erica McCall, who played with more confidence, scored more points, grabbed more rebounds, and seemed more at home in the system. I wonder, however, what happened to Kailee, who did not seem to play.Â
Edit: In reviewing the points scored by half, we scored exactly 36 in each half, but UCLA dropped from 35 in the first half to 20 in the second, with their FG% dropping from 40 to 26. Did we make halftime adjustments that tightened up, or was UCLA just playing at an unsustainable level in the first half, given their lack of depth?
Edit:Â I hate what TV does to game scheduling, and many fans were grumbling about the late start, about having the team on the road for two weeks in a row, and especially about a Monday dinner time game instead of the Sunday afternoon time we are used to.Â
Edit: We played only 9 players tonight--not the 14 or 15 we have been seeing in more lopsided games recently. No Alex, no Kailee (did not dress), no Tess, no Jasmine, no Erica Payne, no Briana. Are we beginning to see an end-of-the-season rotation forming? I was particularly curious not to see Alex given the temporary depletion to our guards, and I wonder what has happened to Jasmine ever since her injury, given that she was the brightest star against UConn in her frosh year.
UCLA fronted Chiney and played an aggressive player defense on the perimeter [Edit: match-up 2-3 zone at times] to keep our offense in check in the first half. They collected 16 O-boards and forced 16 turnovers to neutralize our superior shooting. In the second half, we simply wore them down, and their 8 healthy players could not keep up the intensity, and we pulled away from a one point lead at halftime to a 17 point win.
Flow of the game:
The atmosphere was quite good--4400 and a lot of loud kids made the place feel more full than usual and somewhat raucous. Three young boys sang the national anthem and nearly brought the house down.Â
Tara started her usual five, and a couple of threes helped us take an early lead. But then something odd happened. UCLA caught up, and stayed with us, with 14 lead changes along the way.
Cori Close knows how to defend Chiney better than any other coach in the country, as her team's performance in the Pac 12 finals last year showed. Tonight the game began much the same way. UCLA played a very close player defense on the perimeter, which made it hard to pass. It was one of those games where almost every pass had to be preceeded by a dribble. The close defense also took away many of our three point opportunities.
Inside they often fronted Chiney, meaning that the only way to get a pass to her was to lob it over the defender. I think I saw that work once all night, and when we tried it often resulted in a turnover. At other times they simply shoved and pushed her out of the paint. The defense certainly shook Chiney's early performance. She missed 4 of her first 5 shots.
UCLA's shooting was not particularly good (33%) but they got more O-boards than we did and forced 16 turnovers while committing only 6. That gave them 73 shots compared with our 58--or 15 more chances than we had. They did not have to shoot particularly well to play us close.
At one point, a UCLA player lowered her shoulder and absolutely creamed poor Karlie, who flew to the floor with a sickening thud heard throughout Maples. People shouted with fear and anger for her. Karlie got stuck with the foul, but the good news is that she came back into the game in the second half, so the dreaded concussion seems not to have materialized. This was just one of quite a number of poor calls made. Â
In the second half Sara James opened with 2 consecutive treys and we got a little distance. Even so, UCLA kept within a single digit deep in the game. We did not go up by more than 9 until there were only 7 minutes left. At that point UCLA just seemed to fade while we built a lead.
Before the game, Kate mentioned that UCLA had only 8 players and so we would try to run on them--presumably to exhaust them. I think the strategy may have worked, since UCLA seemed to falter only at the end of the game.
Performances:
Chiney really looked like she was going to be held far short of her averages, and when she picked up her third foul in the second half and had to sit, I was certain of it. But she ultimately got back in the game and chipped away and got 21--a little off pace for the all time scoring record but still a superb performance. Inexplicably, she took only 2 free throws, which in my view reflects very poor officiating. It is easy to push her out of the paint if fouls are never called for doing so.
Erica McCall looked better than she has looked all season. She would up with 12 points on 6/8 shooting. More important, she had 8 rebounds and at times looked like the only player who could snag the rebounds at all. She also had an assist and a block within 17 minutes.
Lili Thompson continues to look absolutely superb. She seemed to be equally comfortable slashing to the basket--and picking up layups and fouls--or accurately shooting the three.Â
Amber picked up two fouls and this gave Lili a chance to play point and Sara a chance to play 16 minutes. Sara was very solid, going 3/3 from three point range. Amber again was quiet offensively, although she had some superb assists, with another amazing 8 assist to 1 turnover ratio.Â
Prior to the game someone asked Kate why Sara was not getting more minutes given that she was starting. Her answer was the standard non-answer you would expect to hear--hard to find time for all the excellent players, every night match ups are different, whoever is performing best, etc. But she said one thing that I thought was a bit revealing and may indicate why Sara continues to start. She said "Sara has a lot in the bank" and referred to her fine work last season. I think that is her way of saying that she is a senior, has made important contributions to the team in the past, and so she deserves the honor of starting even if other players get more time than she does.Â
Parting Thoughts
This game is somewhat concerning. I had thought that UCLA should have been more badly over matched. My biggest positive from this game is the play of Erica McCall, who played with more confidence, scored more points, grabbed more rebounds, and seemed more at home in the system. I wonder, however, what happened to Kailee, who did not seem to play.Â
Edit: In reviewing the points scored by half, we scored exactly 36 in each half, but UCLA dropped from 35 in the first half to 20 in the second, with their FG% dropping from 40 to 26. Did we make halftime adjustments that tightened up, or was UCLA just playing at an unsustainable level in the first half, given their lack of depth?
Edit:Â I hate what TV does to game scheduling, and many fans were grumbling about the late start, about having the team on the road for two weeks in a row, and especially about a Monday dinner time game instead of the Sunday afternoon time we are used to.Â
Edit: We played only 9 players tonight--not the 14 or 15 we have been seeing in more lopsided games recently. No Alex, no Kailee (did not dress), no Tess, no Jasmine, no Erica Payne, no Briana. Are we beginning to see an end-of-the-season rotation forming? I was particularly curious not to see Alex given the temporary depletion to our guards, and I wonder what has happened to Jasmine ever since her injury, given that she was the brightest star against UConn in her frosh year.
01-25-2014, 03:50 AM
I heard that Kailee did not play because she'd received a cortisone injection for a bone spur. Doesn't sound very serious
01-25-2014, 05:40 AM
BC, do you have access to the videos on http://pac-12.com/live or the PAC-12 channel? The game will be repeated several times. Next up in 1.5 hours at 6AM PT Saturday.
BC, do you have access to the videos on http://pac-12.com/live or the PAC-12 channel? The game will be repeated several times. Next up in 1.5 hours at 6AM PT Saturday.
01-25-2014, 09:59 AM
Bone spur might explain why she struggled recently - not just the nose guard
01-25-2014, 11:21 AM
The Merc says that UCLA was running a 2-3 zone to shut down Chiney. I've never been good at recognizing the difference between player and match-up zones. In any case, they always had someone on each of our players "up close and personal" in the first half.Â
I thought the article was a little too harsh about Chiney's performance, when it said she was "all but neutralized Friday night."Â But the quote from Close was good:
By the way, when the thread got reconnected above it broke the link the FBC made to the write up.Â
I thought the article was a little too harsh about Chiney's performance, when it said she was "all but neutralized Friday night."Â But the quote from Close was good:
Quote:UCLA coach Cori Close said she'd "never been so thrilled to hold someone to 21 points."http://www.mercurynews.com/sports/ci_249...whips-ucla
By the way, when the thread got reconnected above it broke the link the FBC made to the write up.Â
The Merc says that UCLA was running a 2-3 zone to shut down Chiney. I've never been good at recognizing the difference between player and match-up zones. In any case, they always had someone on each of our players "up close and personal" in the first half.Â
I thought the article was a little too harsh about Chiney's performance, when it said she was "all but neutralized Friday night."Â But the quote from Close was good:
By the way, when the thread got reconnected above it broke the link the FBC made to the write up.Â
I thought the article was a little too harsh about Chiney's performance, when it said she was "all but neutralized Friday night."Â But the quote from Close was good:
Quote:UCLA coach Cori Close said she'd "never been so thrilled to hold someone to 21 points."http://www.mercurynews.com/sports/ci_249...whips-ucla
By the way, when the thread got reconnected above it broke the link the FBC made to the write up.Â
01-25-2014, 12:43 PM
(01-25-2014, 05:40 AM)MT link Wrote:BC, do you have access to the videos on http://pac-12.com/live or the PAC-12 channel? The game will be repeated several times. Next up in 1.5 hours at 6AM PT Saturday.
I do, but don't have the time to watch it. Three kids and all. I do hope to take my kids to at least one home game.
BC
(01-25-2014, 05:40 AM)MT link Wrote:BC, do you have access to the videos on http://pac-12.com/live or the PAC-12 channel? The game will be repeated several times. Next up in 1.5 hours at 6AM PT Saturday.
I do, but don't have the time to watch it. Three kids and all. I do hope to take my kids to at least one home game.
BC
01-25-2014, 12:59 PM
Work ran late so I didn't get to go to the game, but watched it on TiVo.
FYI, one of the TV commentators was adamant that the foul called on Karlie was a bad call. It is unusual to hear one of the PAC-12 TV people be so strong that the ref made a bad call. The other announcer fell quiet. Yes, I agree it was a bad call from probably every angle but from the ref who made the call. Since I didn't have his angle, I can't tell.
Chiney's 4 fouls were probably right. She got caught with her hand in the cookie jar, er, wrapped around the opponent several times. That's the way she plays, not that I like it. But she doesn't have to play this way and (IMO) should quit some of her moves when she's got 3 fouls.
I thought we'd put more pressure on UCLA by getting their short bench into foul trouble, but that seems to be one talent that our team doesn't possess. Chiney is very good at getting her player called for fouls during regular play (but not while shooting). No one else is getting those fouls called. Chiney's ability to get away from her player when shooting is one of the things that makes her so good, but also minimizes the shooting fouls that are called.
I think one big difference in the second half was that we were able to get our transition offense going while UCLA was hanging around trying to get offensive rebounds. We didn't make them pay in the first half for that. (Note that for the game, we got half the rebounds at our offensive end and 2/3 at our defensive end. Seems like we did better at offensive rebounding than they did.)
It seems that when the opponent is closely guarding Chiney, this gives Erica a chance for a good night. I don't know whether our offense is statistically diversified more, but it surely feels that way. She and Sara had good nights, considering they only played 17 and 16 minutes, respectively.
Sara had 3 offensive rebounds, a 3 pointer (and a missed (contested) shot from under the basket), an assist and no fouls in the first 4:15 before she was pulled. What does it take to stay in the game?
I think UCLA showed that we need to be better at getting our 3 point shooters open. We couldn't just pass the ball around the perimeter and get a shot off. It is telling that only Lili and Sara made threes. Of our 3 pt shooters, they are the ones that move around the most.
I was ambivalent about the game. I didn't like to see the try-too-hard/much turnovers coming back. I was disappointed that UCLA kept both our 3pt shooters and Chiney pretty much in check. (There were quite a number of not-quite-attempted 3 point shots that got wisely pulled back in the last second.) But I was glad to see the rest of the team step up on offense when Chiney was struggling in the first half. Chiney actually got more points in the 1st half (5/11 FG,1/2 FT, 3TO, 1A) than the second (5/7 FG, 0/0 FT, 1TO, 0A) but the offense seemed more in control in the 2nd. It would be interesting to count how many touches she got in each half. The FG% (10/18) for Chiney was down from her average, but the rest of the teams FG% (21/40) was a bit better than their average.
FYI, one of the TV commentators was adamant that the foul called on Karlie was a bad call. It is unusual to hear one of the PAC-12 TV people be so strong that the ref made a bad call. The other announcer fell quiet. Yes, I agree it was a bad call from probably every angle but from the ref who made the call. Since I didn't have his angle, I can't tell.
Chiney's 4 fouls were probably right. She got caught with her hand in the cookie jar, er, wrapped around the opponent several times. That's the way she plays, not that I like it. But she doesn't have to play this way and (IMO) should quit some of her moves when she's got 3 fouls.
I thought we'd put more pressure on UCLA by getting their short bench into foul trouble, but that seems to be one talent that our team doesn't possess. Chiney is very good at getting her player called for fouls during regular play (but not while shooting). No one else is getting those fouls called. Chiney's ability to get away from her player when shooting is one of the things that makes her so good, but also minimizes the shooting fouls that are called.
I think one big difference in the second half was that we were able to get our transition offense going while UCLA was hanging around trying to get offensive rebounds. We didn't make them pay in the first half for that. (Note that for the game, we got half the rebounds at our offensive end and 2/3 at our defensive end. Seems like we did better at offensive rebounding than they did.)
It seems that when the opponent is closely guarding Chiney, this gives Erica a chance for a good night. I don't know whether our offense is statistically diversified more, but it surely feels that way. She and Sara had good nights, considering they only played 17 and 16 minutes, respectively.
Sara had 3 offensive rebounds, a 3 pointer (and a missed (contested) shot from under the basket), an assist and no fouls in the first 4:15 before she was pulled. What does it take to stay in the game?
I think UCLA showed that we need to be better at getting our 3 point shooters open. We couldn't just pass the ball around the perimeter and get a shot off. It is telling that only Lili and Sara made threes. Of our 3 pt shooters, they are the ones that move around the most.
I was ambivalent about the game. I didn't like to see the try-too-hard/much turnovers coming back. I was disappointed that UCLA kept both our 3pt shooters and Chiney pretty much in check. (There were quite a number of not-quite-attempted 3 point shots that got wisely pulled back in the last second.) But I was glad to see the rest of the team step up on offense when Chiney was struggling in the first half. Chiney actually got more points in the 1st half (5/11 FG,1/2 FT, 3TO, 1A) than the second (5/7 FG, 0/0 FT, 1TO, 0A) but the offense seemed more in control in the 2nd. It would be interesting to count how many touches she got in each half. The FG% (10/18) for Chiney was down from her average, but the rest of the teams FG% (21/40) was a bit better than their average.
Work ran late so I didn't get to go to the game, but watched it on TiVo.
FYI, one of the TV commentators was adamant that the foul called on Karlie was a bad call. It is unusual to hear one of the PAC-12 TV people be so strong that the ref made a bad call. The other announcer fell quiet. Yes, I agree it was a bad call from probably every angle but from the ref who made the call. Since I didn't have his angle, I can't tell.
Chiney's 4 fouls were probably right. She got caught with her hand in the cookie jar, er, wrapped around the opponent several times. That's the way she plays, not that I like it. But she doesn't have to play this way and (IMO) should quit some of her moves when she's got 3 fouls.
I thought we'd put more pressure on UCLA by getting their short bench into foul trouble, but that seems to be one talent that our team doesn't possess. Chiney is very good at getting her player called for fouls during regular play (but not while shooting). No one else is getting those fouls called. Chiney's ability to get away from her player when shooting is one of the things that makes her so good, but also minimizes the shooting fouls that are called.
I think one big difference in the second half was that we were able to get our transition offense going while UCLA was hanging around trying to get offensive rebounds. We didn't make them pay in the first half for that. (Note that for the game, we got half the rebounds at our offensive end and 2/3 at our defensive end. Seems like we did better at offensive rebounding than they did.)
It seems that when the opponent is closely guarding Chiney, this gives Erica a chance for a good night. I don't know whether our offense is statistically diversified more, but it surely feels that way. She and Sara had good nights, considering they only played 17 and 16 minutes, respectively.
Sara had 3 offensive rebounds, a 3 pointer (and a missed (contested) shot from under the basket), an assist and no fouls in the first 4:15 before she was pulled. What does it take to stay in the game?
I think UCLA showed that we need to be better at getting our 3 point shooters open. We couldn't just pass the ball around the perimeter and get a shot off. It is telling that only Lili and Sara made threes. Of our 3 pt shooters, they are the ones that move around the most.
I was ambivalent about the game. I didn't like to see the try-too-hard/much turnovers coming back. I was disappointed that UCLA kept both our 3pt shooters and Chiney pretty much in check. (There were quite a number of not-quite-attempted 3 point shots that got wisely pulled back in the last second.) But I was glad to see the rest of the team step up on offense when Chiney was struggling in the first half. Chiney actually got more points in the 1st half (5/11 FG,1/2 FT, 3TO, 1A) than the second (5/7 FG, 0/0 FT, 1TO, 0A) but the offense seemed more in control in the 2nd. It would be interesting to count how many touches she got in each half. The FG% (10/18) for Chiney was down from her average, but the rest of the teams FG% (21/40) was a bit better than their average.
FYI, one of the TV commentators was adamant that the foul called on Karlie was a bad call. It is unusual to hear one of the PAC-12 TV people be so strong that the ref made a bad call. The other announcer fell quiet. Yes, I agree it was a bad call from probably every angle but from the ref who made the call. Since I didn't have his angle, I can't tell.
Chiney's 4 fouls were probably right. She got caught with her hand in the cookie jar, er, wrapped around the opponent several times. That's the way she plays, not that I like it. But she doesn't have to play this way and (IMO) should quit some of her moves when she's got 3 fouls.
I thought we'd put more pressure on UCLA by getting their short bench into foul trouble, but that seems to be one talent that our team doesn't possess. Chiney is very good at getting her player called for fouls during regular play (but not while shooting). No one else is getting those fouls called. Chiney's ability to get away from her player when shooting is one of the things that makes her so good, but also minimizes the shooting fouls that are called.
I think one big difference in the second half was that we were able to get our transition offense going while UCLA was hanging around trying to get offensive rebounds. We didn't make them pay in the first half for that. (Note that for the game, we got half the rebounds at our offensive end and 2/3 at our defensive end. Seems like we did better at offensive rebounding than they did.)
It seems that when the opponent is closely guarding Chiney, this gives Erica a chance for a good night. I don't know whether our offense is statistically diversified more, but it surely feels that way. She and Sara had good nights, considering they only played 17 and 16 minutes, respectively.
Sara had 3 offensive rebounds, a 3 pointer (and a missed (contested) shot from under the basket), an assist and no fouls in the first 4:15 before she was pulled. What does it take to stay in the game?
I think UCLA showed that we need to be better at getting our 3 point shooters open. We couldn't just pass the ball around the perimeter and get a shot off. It is telling that only Lili and Sara made threes. Of our 3 pt shooters, they are the ones that move around the most.
I was ambivalent about the game. I didn't like to see the try-too-hard/much turnovers coming back. I was disappointed that UCLA kept both our 3pt shooters and Chiney pretty much in check. (There were quite a number of not-quite-attempted 3 point shots that got wisely pulled back in the last second.) But I was glad to see the rest of the team step up on offense when Chiney was struggling in the first half. Chiney actually got more points in the 1st half (5/11 FG,1/2 FT, 3TO, 1A) than the second (5/7 FG, 0/0 FT, 1TO, 0A) but the offense seemed more in control in the 2nd. It would be interesting to count how many touches she got in each half. The FG% (10/18) for Chiney was down from her average, but the rest of the teams FG% (21/40) was a bit better than their average.
WAcard
Unregistered
Unregistered
01-25-2014, 01:57 PM
Finally I get your bias MT - what does it take to stay in the game? Why don't you ask 80% of the team. Sara has been starting and the question should have been Why if you look at her stats for the her career. Must be nice to get that kind of confidence to start given your poor statistics and know you will start regardless of them - so she finally has a decent game out of how many and you ask that question - yeah right!
Maybe questions like why are we not zoning teams like UCLA who have struggled v a zone, would be more appropriate. Why are our bigs not boxing out, this is becoming epidemic. And the ball movement is not better with Sara it is much better with Taylor and our other players. Taylor has deserved to start and why have you not asked this question?
Maybe questions like why are we not zoning teams like UCLA who have struggled v a zone, would be more appropriate. Why are our bigs not boxing out, this is becoming epidemic. And the ball movement is not better with Sara it is much better with Taylor and our other players. Taylor has deserved to start and why have you not asked this question?
Finally I get your bias MT - what does it take to stay in the game? Why don't you ask 80% of the team. Sara has been starting and the question should have been Why if you look at her stats for the her career. Must be nice to get that kind of confidence to start given your poor statistics and know you will start regardless of them - so she finally has a decent game out of how many and you ask that question - yeah right!
Maybe questions like why are we not zoning teams like UCLA who have struggled v a zone, would be more appropriate. Why are our bigs not boxing out, this is becoming epidemic. And the ball movement is not better with Sara it is much better with Taylor and our other players. Taylor has deserved to start and why have you not asked this question?
Maybe questions like why are we not zoning teams like UCLA who have struggled v a zone, would be more appropriate. Why are our bigs not boxing out, this is becoming epidemic. And the ball movement is not better with Sara it is much better with Taylor and our other players. Taylor has deserved to start and why have you not asked this question?
01-25-2014, 03:56 PM
(01-25-2014, 12:59 PM)MT link Wrote:I think UCLA showed that we need to be better at getting our 3 point shooters open. We couldn't just pass the ball around the perimeter and get a shot off. It is telling that only Lili and Sara made threes. Of our 3 pt shooters, they are the ones that move around the most.Good point.
I also share WAcard's enthusiasm for Taylor, although I could do with a little less invective.
In any case, U.SC on Monday is a much better team and we need to fix this before we face them. I imagine Tara is working on ball movement today.
(01-25-2014, 12:59 PM)MT link Wrote:I think UCLA showed that we need to be better at getting our 3 point shooters open. We couldn't just pass the ball around the perimeter and get a shot off. It is telling that only Lili and Sara made threes. Of our 3 pt shooters, they are the ones that move around the most.Good point.
I also share WAcard's enthusiasm for Taylor, although I could do with a little less invective.
In any case, U.SC on Monday is a much better team and we need to fix this before we face them. I imagine Tara is working on ball movement today.
BBGuru
Unregistered
Unregistered
01-26-2014, 12:57 PM
I just had a chance to watch the game so I'm late with this, but I really enjoyed it.
The whole team seemed a bit off in the beginning, and Chiney definitely had trouble early on, but I like the way she recovered. 21 points against tough competition is nothing to sneeze at, even though we have become accustomed to getting more from her. I think her subdued scoring forced others to step up and show what they are made of. McCall did a wonderful job and she looked very confident and aggressive on the boards, and more coordinated in her shots, the way I have become accustomed to seeing her play. 12 points and 8 rebounds is a great contribution from her, and I predict she will get better and better as she gets more playing time. Thompson is a stellar frosh who has a multi-faceted game. She can nail 3s, drive for layups, and efficiently dish. And her defense is always energetic and intense. Ruef is sometimes a double-edged sword. We need her in there for the intangibles that don't show up on the stat lines, but she is scary when she pretends to be a point guard or forces her way to the basket against two or three defenders. I value her passes and the smart way she uses her body. I don't think anyone else on the team can do what she does. I really enjoyed James' performance. She stepped up in a big way and hit her shots, and her defense was very solid. She seems to be a very hard worker, and always stays very intense and focused on the court. I didn't understand why Tara took her out and forgot about her, when the other 3pt shooters were limited on defense and ineffective offensively. I believe James and Thompson got 3 and 2 outside shots respectively, and all other 3pt shooters were pretty much cuffed. Greenfield has her strengths, but we desperately needed points so I thought James should have been in the game down the stretch. Amber did a great job with her 8 assists. She was responsible for getting the ball to McCall at least twice and allowing her to score. However, at times I was concerned by Amber's sluggish defense. I wonder if something is going on with her. She had a few moments when she looked good, but overall I thought she needed to hustle much more and show much more defensive intensity.
I'm hoping to see improvement in our overall rebounding. We should have done better in that regard against this team. Our turnovers were alarming. Some looked like mental lapses, others were just telegraphed passes that alert players can pick off.
As for the refs, they were inept and the tv commentators weren't much better.Â
I watched the replay of that shot to Samuelson a couple of times and it looked like a push off to the chest with some shoulder involvement to me. It didn't look "brutal" and especially not hostile or malicious. There was no punch, no swing, and no elbow to warrant throwing a player out of game, as some have suggested elsewhere. Samuelson is not muscular or sturdy, and she flew backwards under the force of the push off and hit the ground pretty hard. I've read so much shocked outrage from fans regarding something that happens all the time in basketball, along with moving screens and arm bars. Stanford players don't typically employ those techniques, perhaps because they do not resort to such aggressive play, but that push off is a common offensive technique that many players are accustomed to getting away with in order to create space, and it needs to be immediately called as an offensive foul. The refs definitely got the call wrong, which is part of what fuels the outrage. Thankfully Samuelson wasn't hurt and was able to come back in the game and play somewhat effectively.
I just had a chance to watch the game so I'm late with this, but I really enjoyed it.
The whole team seemed a bit off in the beginning, and Chiney definitely had trouble early on, but I like the way she recovered. 21 points against tough competition is nothing to sneeze at, even though we have become accustomed to getting more from her. I think her subdued scoring forced others to step up and show what they are made of. McCall did a wonderful job and she looked very confident and aggressive on the boards, and more coordinated in her shots, the way I have become accustomed to seeing her play. 12 points and 8 rebounds is a great contribution from her, and I predict she will get better and better as she gets more playing time. Thompson is a stellar frosh who has a multi-faceted game. She can nail 3s, drive for layups, and efficiently dish. And her defense is always energetic and intense. Ruef is sometimes a double-edged sword. We need her in there for the intangibles that don't show up on the stat lines, but she is scary when she pretends to be a point guard or forces her way to the basket against two or three defenders. I value her passes and the smart way she uses her body. I don't think anyone else on the team can do what she does. I really enjoyed James' performance. She stepped up in a big way and hit her shots, and her defense was very solid. She seems to be a very hard worker, and always stays very intense and focused on the court. I didn't understand why Tara took her out and forgot about her, when the other 3pt shooters were limited on defense and ineffective offensively. I believe James and Thompson got 3 and 2 outside shots respectively, and all other 3pt shooters were pretty much cuffed. Greenfield has her strengths, but we desperately needed points so I thought James should have been in the game down the stretch. Amber did a great job with her 8 assists. She was responsible for getting the ball to McCall at least twice and allowing her to score. However, at times I was concerned by Amber's sluggish defense. I wonder if something is going on with her. She had a few moments when she looked good, but overall I thought she needed to hustle much more and show much more defensive intensity.
I'm hoping to see improvement in our overall rebounding. We should have done better in that regard against this team. Our turnovers were alarming. Some looked like mental lapses, others were just telegraphed passes that alert players can pick off.
As for the refs, they were inept and the tv commentators weren't much better.Â
I watched the replay of that shot to Samuelson a couple of times and it looked like a push off to the chest with some shoulder involvement to me. It didn't look "brutal" and especially not hostile or malicious. There was no punch, no swing, and no elbow to warrant throwing a player out of game, as some have suggested elsewhere. Samuelson is not muscular or sturdy, and she flew backwards under the force of the push off and hit the ground pretty hard. I've read so much shocked outrage from fans regarding something that happens all the time in basketball, along with moving screens and arm bars. Stanford players don't typically employ those techniques, perhaps because they do not resort to such aggressive play, but that push off is a common offensive technique that many players are accustomed to getting away with in order to create space, and it needs to be immediately called as an offensive foul. The refs definitely got the call wrong, which is part of what fuels the outrage. Thankfully Samuelson wasn't hurt and was able to come back in the game and play somewhat effectively.
BBGuru
Unregistered
Unregistered
01-26-2014, 01:20 PM
(01-25-2014, 12:59 PM)MT link Wrote:Sara had 3 offensive rebounds, a 3 pointer (and a missed (contested) shot from under the basket), an assist and no fouls in the first 4:15 before she was pulled. What does it take to stay in the game?
I agree. When you're short on points and playing a tough team, what does it matter who started which games and what your past career stats are? Under those conditions only the present has potential, and if you're shooting with a hot hand and putting points on the board, rebounding, passing well, getting assists and playing tough, threatening defense, why someone else isn't starting, and what the past statistics say are irrelevant.
I thought Tara should have left James in. At 4-5 FG, 3-3 from 3pt land, no fouls, 5 rebounds, 2 assists, and 11 solid points in just 16 minutes, her stat line on that particular night was stronger than Greenfield's at 2-7 FG, 0-3 3ptrs, 0-1 free throws, 3 Fouls, 3 Rebounds, 2 assists, and 4 points in 23 minutes of play.
All the other noise about zoning teams and bigs not boxing out and who deserves what as it relates to James' performance in this particular game makes no sense and is just noise.
(01-25-2014, 12:59 PM)MT link Wrote:Sara had 3 offensive rebounds, a 3 pointer (and a missed (contested) shot from under the basket), an assist and no fouls in the first 4:15 before she was pulled. What does it take to stay in the game?
I agree. When you're short on points and playing a tough team, what does it matter who started which games and what your past career stats are? Under those conditions only the present has potential, and if you're shooting with a hot hand and putting points on the board, rebounding, passing well, getting assists and playing tough, threatening defense, why someone else isn't starting, and what the past statistics say are irrelevant.
I thought Tara should have left James in. At 4-5 FG, 3-3 from 3pt land, no fouls, 5 rebounds, 2 assists, and 11 solid points in just 16 minutes, her stat line on that particular night was stronger than Greenfield's at 2-7 FG, 0-3 3ptrs, 0-1 free throws, 3 Fouls, 3 Rebounds, 2 assists, and 4 points in 23 minutes of play.
All the other noise about zoning teams and bigs not boxing out and who deserves what as it relates to James' performance in this particular game makes no sense and is just noise.
01-26-2014, 02:11 PM
I wonder sometimes about things we fans do not know about the players. Part of the fun of being a "fan" is NOT having all the information and still speculating about the decisions made by those who do.Â
It is a given that Tara has reasons for playing Sara the way she does. But what those reasons are may remain a mystery to us.
Tara certainly wants to rotate guards some to keep them fresh, and since Sara will be part of a rotation, why not start her? Before the game Kate mentioned that Sara had "a lot in the bank." I took that to mean that Sara's hard work, senior status, or contributions through adversity (stepping in last year for Toni?) had earned her the respect of her coaches.  If she is only going to get 9 minutes, at least they can give her the honor of starting.
And then there is the possibility that there is more there than meets the eye. At this time last year we really had little idea of what was wrong with Toni. It is always a possibility that Sara has something going on that interferes with her endurance.
Sara's playing time surged in her junior year, especially after Toni's play decreased and then stopped. It is beginning to look as if her senior year will be somewhere in between the two patterns.Â
Year  Started Minutes
13-14Â 13Â Â Â Â Â 12
12-13Â 21Â Â Â Â Â 17
11-12Â 0Â Â Â Â Â Â 7
10-11Â 0Â Â Â Â Â Â 8
It is a given that Tara has reasons for playing Sara the way she does. But what those reasons are may remain a mystery to us.
Tara certainly wants to rotate guards some to keep them fresh, and since Sara will be part of a rotation, why not start her? Before the game Kate mentioned that Sara had "a lot in the bank." I took that to mean that Sara's hard work, senior status, or contributions through adversity (stepping in last year for Toni?) had earned her the respect of her coaches.  If she is only going to get 9 minutes, at least they can give her the honor of starting.
And then there is the possibility that there is more there than meets the eye. At this time last year we really had little idea of what was wrong with Toni. It is always a possibility that Sara has something going on that interferes with her endurance.
Sara's playing time surged in her junior year, especially after Toni's play decreased and then stopped. It is beginning to look as if her senior year will be somewhere in between the two patterns.Â
Year  Started Minutes
13-14Â 13Â Â Â Â Â 12
12-13Â 21Â Â Â Â Â 17
11-12Â 0Â Â Â Â Â Â 7
10-11Â 0Â Â Â Â Â Â 8
I wonder sometimes about things we fans do not know about the players. Part of the fun of being a "fan" is NOT having all the information and still speculating about the decisions made by those who do.Â
It is a given that Tara has reasons for playing Sara the way she does. But what those reasons are may remain a mystery to us.
Tara certainly wants to rotate guards some to keep them fresh, and since Sara will be part of a rotation, why not start her? Before the game Kate mentioned that Sara had "a lot in the bank." I took that to mean that Sara's hard work, senior status, or contributions through adversity (stepping in last year for Toni?) had earned her the respect of her coaches.  If she is only going to get 9 minutes, at least they can give her the honor of starting.
And then there is the possibility that there is more there than meets the eye. At this time last year we really had little idea of what was wrong with Toni. It is always a possibility that Sara has something going on that interferes with her endurance.
Sara's playing time surged in her junior year, especially after Toni's play decreased and then stopped. It is beginning to look as if her senior year will be somewhere in between the two patterns.Â
Year  Started Minutes
13-14Â 13Â Â Â Â Â 12
12-13Â 21Â Â Â Â Â 17
11-12Â 0Â Â Â Â Â Â 7
10-11Â 0Â Â Â Â Â Â 8
It is a given that Tara has reasons for playing Sara the way she does. But what those reasons are may remain a mystery to us.
Tara certainly wants to rotate guards some to keep them fresh, and since Sara will be part of a rotation, why not start her? Before the game Kate mentioned that Sara had "a lot in the bank." I took that to mean that Sara's hard work, senior status, or contributions through adversity (stepping in last year for Toni?) had earned her the respect of her coaches.  If she is only going to get 9 minutes, at least they can give her the honor of starting.
And then there is the possibility that there is more there than meets the eye. At this time last year we really had little idea of what was wrong with Toni. It is always a possibility that Sara has something going on that interferes with her endurance.
Sara's playing time surged in her junior year, especially after Toni's play decreased and then stopped. It is beginning to look as if her senior year will be somewhere in between the two patterns.Â
Year  Started Minutes
13-14Â 13Â Â Â Â Â 12
12-13Â 21Â Â Â Â Â 17
11-12Â 0Â Â Â Â Â Â 7
10-11Â 0Â Â Â Â Â Â 8
BBGuru
Unregistered
Unregistered
01-26-2014, 02:45 PM
You sound very wise and rational, 81 alum.
I agree, there is much that we don't know, and sometimes we just have to satisfy ourselves with speculation.
I agree, there is much that we don't know, and sometimes we just have to satisfy ourselves with speculation.
You sound very wise and rational, 81 alum.
I agree, there is much that we don't know, and sometimes we just have to satisfy ourselves with speculation.
I agree, there is much that we don't know, and sometimes we just have to satisfy ourselves with speculation.
WAcard
Unregistered
Unregistered
01-28-2014, 10:26 AM
The backhanded comments by a certain poster are just rediculous and unwarranted they are aimed at putting down certain players who are in effect a threat to their own favorite player, who the same poster gushes about. I find them distasteful and pathetic.
Amber is a much better defender than the posters favorite player. When she defends she does not foul or stop defending to avoid fouls and does not let them fly by her. She also sees the floor for all players and does not avoid passing to players where they could score more points than themselves. Amber is a team player and liked by all the players on the team. She does not quit or sit out for any excuse as she knows that by doing so hurts her teammates having to pick up on the slack. Along with the other players this poster continues to put down, she and them are all team players and have each others respect which does not extend to a player who is more concerned about getting their own.
Amber is a much better defender than the posters favorite player. When she defends she does not foul or stop defending to avoid fouls and does not let them fly by her. She also sees the floor for all players and does not avoid passing to players where they could score more points than themselves. Amber is a team player and liked by all the players on the team. She does not quit or sit out for any excuse as she knows that by doing so hurts her teammates having to pick up on the slack. Along with the other players this poster continues to put down, she and them are all team players and have each others respect which does not extend to a player who is more concerned about getting their own.
The backhanded comments by a certain poster are just rediculous and unwarranted they are aimed at putting down certain players who are in effect a threat to their own favorite player, who the same poster gushes about. I find them distasteful and pathetic.
Amber is a much better defender than the posters favorite player. When she defends she does not foul or stop defending to avoid fouls and does not let them fly by her. She also sees the floor for all players and does not avoid passing to players where they could score more points than themselves. Amber is a team player and liked by all the players on the team. She does not quit or sit out for any excuse as she knows that by doing so hurts her teammates having to pick up on the slack. Along with the other players this poster continues to put down, she and them are all team players and have each others respect which does not extend to a player who is more concerned about getting their own.
Amber is a much better defender than the posters favorite player. When she defends she does not foul or stop defending to avoid fouls and does not let them fly by her. She also sees the floor for all players and does not avoid passing to players where they could score more points than themselves. Amber is a team player and liked by all the players on the team. She does not quit or sit out for any excuse as she knows that by doing so hurts her teammates having to pick up on the slack. Along with the other players this poster continues to put down, she and them are all team players and have each others respect which does not extend to a player who is more concerned about getting their own.
01-28-2014, 10:48 AM
If you want to play in the sandbox, you can't throw sand at the other children.
01-29-2014, 01:04 PM
Come on please listen to Yvonne. This is a great fun season and we are spoiled with 5 F4s in the past 6 years.  But we can act nice. Right?
Different subject but go to Chalk Talks and learn why a player might not re enter.  My hat is off for giving her team and us fans 100% every moment.Â
Last year Jos played while ill for a month or two and at her graduation was still wearing a boot.  Please assume these young women are giving 100% at all times.Â
Please do not assume a new poster is a parent.Â
Different subject but go to Chalk Talks and learn why a player might not re enter.  My hat is off for giving her team and us fans 100% every moment.Â
Last year Jos played while ill for a month or two and at her graduation was still wearing a boot.  Please assume these young women are giving 100% at all times.Â
Please do not assume a new poster is a parent.Â
Come on please listen to Yvonne. This is a great fun season and we are spoiled with 5 F4s in the past 6 years.  But we can act nice. Right?
Different subject but go to Chalk Talks and learn why a player might not re enter.  My hat is off for giving her team and us fans 100% every moment.Â
Last year Jos played while ill for a month or two and at her graduation was still wearing a boot.  Please assume these young women are giving 100% at all times.Â
Please do not assume a new poster is a parent.Â
Different subject but go to Chalk Talks and learn why a player might not re enter.  My hat is off for giving her team and us fans 100% every moment.Â
Last year Jos played while ill for a month or two and at her graduation was still wearing a boot.  Please assume these young women are giving 100% at all times.Â
Please do not assume a new poster is a parent.Â
WAcard
Unregistered
Unregistered
01-29-2014, 01:34 PM
Hence my post, and I will continue to post for the other 99% of the team that gets put down when they don't deserve it and as requested I will stick to the content basketball related. I was naive to think we posted just about the game.
Hence my post, and I will continue to post for the other 99% of the team that gets put down when they don't deserve it and as requested I will stick to the content basketball related. I was naive to think we posted just about the game.
WAcard
Unregistered
Unregistered
oops note to administrator somebodies not playing nicely in the sandbox!
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »