post game interview with Belibi - "I came here to play"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuTZtJ_L...e=youtu.be
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuTZtJ_L...e=youtu.be
(01-26-2020, 03:39 PM)Snorlax94 Wrote: That was fun!
It was my first WBB game and my third third M/W BB game.
Is Maples always that crowded for WBB games or was there something special? It seemed more full than the men’s games I’ve gone to. And I swear the fans were more fired up. The entire lots near sunken diamond were full (maybe there was another event), so I had to circle back and to my surprise the garage still had many spots.
(01-26-2020, 03:39 PM)Snorlax94 Wrote: That was fun!
It was my first WBB game and my third third M/W BB game.
Is Maples always that crowded for WBB games or was there something special? It seemed more full than the men’s games I’ve gone to. And I swear the fans were more fired up. The entire lots near sunken diamond were full (maybe there was another event), so I had to circle back and to my surprise the garage still had many spots.
(01-26-2020, 05:17 PM)81alum Wrote: [quote="2006alum" pid='268514' dateline='1580083756']and next year we will have cameron brink, who has a similar game to prechtel, but higher-ranked and quicker, though more slender.
Next year I expect we will see both Prechtel and Belibi on the floor together at the same time, and it could prove to be a great offensive combo. With Prechtel's jumpshot, she could sit at the elbow and play the high low game with Belibi's jumping ability at the low post.
(01-26-2020, 05:17 PM)81alum Wrote: [quote="2006alum" pid='268514' dateline='1580083756']and next year we will have cameron brink, who has a similar game to prechtel, but higher-ranked and quicker, though more slender.
Next year I expect we will see both Prechtel and Belibi on the floor together at the same time, and it could prove to be a great offensive combo. With Prechtel's jumpshot, she could sit at the elbow and play the high low game with Belibi's jumping ability at the low post.
(01-27-2020, 09:02 AM)Spike Wrote: In the first half we persistently tried to pound it inside, but after half time Prechtel and Jump came out early and shot about 20 3-pointers (about 19 of them went in!). I told my wife that we were now going to see a different offense and indeed we did!
Tara knows best.
(01-27-2020, 09:02 AM)Spike Wrote: In the first half we persistently tried to pound it inside, but after half time Prechtel and Jump came out early and shot about 20 3-pointers (about 19 of them went in!). I told my wife that we were now going to see a different offense and indeed we did!
Tara knows best.
(01-27-2020, 09:29 AM)BosCard Wrote:Absolutely!(01-27-2020, 09:02 AM)Spike Wrote: In the first half we persistently tried to pound it inside, but after half time Prechtel and Jump came out early and shot about 20 3-pointers (about 19 of them went in!). I told my wife that we were now going to see a different offense and indeed we did!
Tara knows best.
Jump is such a special shooter that everytime she gets a good 3 point shot off (and by good I mean relatively open) everyone on the team and in the stands expects her to make it. And in this game, she missed three 3’s in a row. If that was another player we would have drawn up a different plan. But with Jump we just assumed the next three 3’s would go in and they did.
(01-27-2020, 09:29 AM)BosCard Wrote:Absolutely!(01-27-2020, 09:02 AM)Spike Wrote: In the first half we persistently tried to pound it inside, but after half time Prechtel and Jump came out early and shot about 20 3-pointers (about 19 of them went in!). I told my wife that we were now going to see a different offense and indeed we did!
Tara knows best.
Jump is such a special shooter that everytime she gets a good 3 point shot off (and by good I mean relatively open) everyone on the team and in the stands expects her to make it. And in this game, she missed three 3’s in a row. If that was another player we would have drawn up a different plan. But with Jump we just assumed the next three 3’s would go in and they did.
(01-27-2020, 05:41 AM)2006alum Wrote: And, as also pointed out by that NY Times article, our 5(!) total turnovers vs. Utah was our lowest in a conference game since finishing with four against Arizona... in 2010, a decade ago!
(01-27-2020, 05:41 AM)2006alum Wrote: And, as also pointed out by that NY Times article, our 5(!) total turnovers vs. Utah was our lowest in a conference game since finishing with four against Arizona... in 2010, a decade ago!
(01-27-2020, 11:57 AM)BostonCard Wrote:(01-27-2020, 05:41 AM)2006alum Wrote: And, as also pointed out by that NY Times article, our 5(!) total turnovers vs. Utah was our lowest in a conference game since finishing with four against Arizona... in 2010, a decade ago!
All the more amazing given the number of minutes the freshmen played (freshmen are more turnover prone), and with the injury situation, how many minutes our players played (tired players are more injury prone).
BC
(01-27-2020, 11:57 AM)BostonCard Wrote:(01-27-2020, 05:41 AM)2006alum Wrote: And, as also pointed out by that NY Times article, our 5(!) total turnovers vs. Utah was our lowest in a conference game since finishing with four against Arizona... in 2010, a decade ago!
All the more amazing given the number of minutes the freshmen played (freshmen are more turnover prone), and with the injury situation, how many minutes our players played (tired players are more injury prone).
BC
(01-27-2020, 12:43 PM)BosCard Wrote: I'm trying to decide how much our our good offensive execution and low turnover rate vs Utah is our players becoming better at running the offense vs Utah being not that physical of a defensive team. If we had been playing OSU or ASU, would our offense have flowed as well? I think it may be a bit of both. Our offense is quite complicated and is so timing dependent. For example we run a lot of double screens for Lexie where she curls around the paint and then has the option to shoot a free throw jumper or drive to the basket. There is so much that has to go right in terms of the timing of the screens by Fingall and Belibi as well as the timing of the pass from Williams to Lexie. So yes I think the more we run it the better we will get at our complex offense. But also a very good and physical defensive team would probably do a better job disrupting it.
(01-27-2020, 12:43 PM)BosCard Wrote: I'm trying to decide how much our our good offensive execution and low turnover rate vs Utah is our players becoming better at running the offense vs Utah being not that physical of a defensive team. If we had been playing OSU or ASU, would our offense have flowed as well? I think it may be a bit of both. Our offense is quite complicated and is so timing dependent. For example we run a lot of double screens for Lexie where she curls around the paint and then has the option to shoot a free throw jumper or drive to the basket. There is so much that has to go right in terms of the timing of the screens by Fingall and Belibi as well as the timing of the pass from Williams to Lexie. So yes I think the more we run it the better we will get at our complex offense. But also a very good and physical defensive team would probably do a better job disrupting it.
(01-27-2020, 03:06 PM)teejers1 Wrote: Stanford ran a clinic on offense out there against Utah. Every variation/progression on the O seemed to work: pick and roll; fake screen and go to hoop, etc. Tara won't admit it publicly, but that was damn near perfect execution by the Cardinal women Sunday afternoon.
And yeah, Utah may not be great defensively, but still . . .
P.S. Also liked few fouls/foul shots, and a nice, tidy game.
(01-27-2020, 03:06 PM)teejers1 Wrote: Stanford ran a clinic on offense out there against Utah. Every variation/progression on the O seemed to work: pick and roll; fake screen and go to hoop, etc. Tara won't admit it publicly, but that was damn near perfect execution by the Cardinal women Sunday afternoon.
And yeah, Utah may not be great defensively, but still . . .
P.S. Also liked few fouls/foul shots, and a nice, tidy game.
(01-27-2020, 03:32 PM)BostonCard Wrote: I did like the fact that late in the third quarter we kept pushing the three point shots until they started to go in. I'm not sure if it was a response to a defensive move by Utah to take away the inside (didn't really look like it to my untrained eyes), or if we just made a commitment to shoot ourselves out of the slump. Whatever it was, it worked, and we wound up with about a 30% three point shooting percentage, after starting 1/10.
BC
(01-27-2020, 03:32 PM)BostonCard Wrote: I did like the fact that late in the third quarter we kept pushing the three point shots until they started to go in. I'm not sure if it was a response to a defensive move by Utah to take away the inside (didn't really look like it to my untrained eyes), or if we just made a commitment to shoot ourselves out of the slump. Whatever it was, it worked, and we wound up with about a 30% three point shooting percentage, after starting 1/10.
BC
(01-27-2020, 05:03 PM)crackpot Wrote:(01-27-2020, 03:32 PM)BostonCard Wrote: I did like the fact that late in the third quarter we kept pushing the three point shots until they started to go in. I'm not sure if it was a response to a defensive move by Utah to take away the inside (didn't really look like it to my untrained eyes), or if we just made a commitment to shoot ourselves out of the slump. Whatever it was, it worked, and we wound up with about a 30% three point shooting percentage, after starting 1/10.
BC
Everyone around me was like, "Yeah, keep going!" especially with Jump. We've seen this movie before (Jump goes in, misses a few threes, then boom, TREY CITY!).
(01-27-2020, 05:03 PM)crackpot Wrote:(01-27-2020, 03:32 PM)BostonCard Wrote: I did like the fact that late in the third quarter we kept pushing the three point shots until they started to go in. I'm not sure if it was a response to a defensive move by Utah to take away the inside (didn't really look like it to my untrained eyes), or if we just made a commitment to shoot ourselves out of the slump. Whatever it was, it worked, and we wound up with about a 30% three point shooting percentage, after starting 1/10.
BC
Everyone around me was like, "Yeah, keep going!" especially with Jump. We've seen this movie before (Jump goes in, misses a few threes, then boom, TREY CITY!).
(01-27-2020, 08:09 PM)Viking_Guy Wrote: The wins list I was consulting was out of date; Tara needs 13 to tie, 14 to pass Pat. I think she has 1085, and Geno has 1080. Geno would have to win out to break the record this year, but wouldn't be amazing if Tara could break it in the NCAA tourney? Against some good competition?
And hoping Geno finds the Ducks, Gamecocks, and maybe even one other team a bit much.
As I updated, I looked at who they had played - Stanford with three wins at RPI #16 OSU, and against #97 Utah and #43 Colorado at home. UConn with the aforementioned win over the #51 Vols, but then two, ahem, great wins against #216 Tulsa and #271 (!) East Carolina.
Sorry, as a CT expat, I have to deal with a bit too much Geno worship <grin>. Sometimes I overreact. But every team in the Pac-12 is ranked higher than the middle of the AAC (#11 in Pac-12 UW is RPI 107; #12 is Cal at 127; in the AAC, #6 Tulane is #125, # 7 Memphis is 160). If the Huskies lose either of the two marquee games, I think they're out of the running for a 1 seed. If they lose both, they might be a 3.
A consummation devoutly to be wished.
VG
(01-27-2020, 08:09 PM)Viking_Guy Wrote: The wins list I was consulting was out of date; Tara needs 13 to tie, 14 to pass Pat. I think she has 1085, and Geno has 1080. Geno would have to win out to break the record this year, but wouldn't be amazing if Tara could break it in the NCAA tourney? Against some good competition?
And hoping Geno finds the Ducks, Gamecocks, and maybe even one other team a bit much.
As I updated, I looked at who they had played - Stanford with three wins at RPI #16 OSU, and against #97 Utah and #43 Colorado at home. UConn with the aforementioned win over the #51 Vols, but then two, ahem, great wins against #216 Tulsa and #271 (!) East Carolina.
Sorry, as a CT expat, I have to deal with a bit too much Geno worship <grin>. Sometimes I overreact. But every team in the Pac-12 is ranked higher than the middle of the AAC (#11 in Pac-12 UW is RPI 107; #12 is Cal at 127; in the AAC, #6 Tulane is #125, # 7 Memphis is 160). If the Huskies lose either of the two marquee games, I think they're out of the running for a 1 seed. If they lose both, they might be a 3.
A consummation devoutly to be wished.
VG
(01-27-2020, 07:02 PM)Viking_Guy Wrote: Geno won't do it this year - needs 21 18 wins with a max of 19 games remaining, 10 regular, 3 [conference] tourney, and possible 6 ... NCAA games. Tara has the same set up, needing 16 13 wins [to tie]
(01-27-2020, 07:02 PM)Viking_Guy Wrote: Geno won't do it this year - needs 21 18 wins with a max of 19 games remaining, 10 regular, 3 [conference] tourney, and possible 6 ... NCAA games. Tara has the same set up, needing 16 13 wins [to tie]
(01-27-2020, 10:52 PM)81alum Wrote: I wish I understood RPI better. How can UConn be 7 in RPI when it plays so many patsies?
Strength of schedule is:
1 Virginia
2 South Carolina
3 Indiana
4 Maryland
5 Oregon
6 Oregon State
7 Ohio State
8 Baylor
9 Stanford
10 Duke
11 Iowa
12 UConn
(01-27-2020, 10:52 PM)81alum Wrote: I wish I understood RPI better. How can UConn be 7 in RPI when it plays so many patsies?
Strength of schedule is:
1 Virginia
2 South Carolina
3 Indiana
4 Maryland
5 Oregon
6 Oregon State
7 Ohio State
8 Baylor
9 Stanford
10 Duke
11 Iowa
12 UConn
(01-27-2020, 05:41 AM)2006alum Wrote: -Given how tightlipped the coaches have been about Jones' status (who, I'll note, did not seem to be on the bench with the rest of the team), I found this line from the NY Times article especially noteworthy: "VanDerveer has remained optimistic of Jones returning this season."
If so, that is a considerably rosier picture than I feel like we've gotten so far, because "this season" really only has about 8-9 weeks left in it, which would rule out any really serious injuries.
(01-27-2020, 05:41 AM)2006alum Wrote: -Given how tightlipped the coaches have been about Jones' status (who, I'll note, did not seem to be on the bench with the rest of the team), I found this line from the NY Times article especially noteworthy: "VanDerveer has remained optimistic of Jones returning this season."
If so, that is a considerably rosier picture than I feel like we've gotten so far, because "this season" really only has about 8-9 weeks left in it, which would rule out any really serious injuries.