03-20-2023, 05:48 PM
A few thoughts:
Zone is probably the wrong defense for a team that shot 45% from 3.
The game was largely decided because we were out rebounded 44-39 and had 21 turnovers. Except for our three point defense, we actually did ok on the defensive end, holding the Rebels to under 30% shooting (19/64). The issue is that because of the 20 offensive rebounds and 21 Stanford turnovers, they had 12 more shots than we did (64-52).
Many of those turnovers happened specifically because we were trying to feed Brink. You can't really fault the strategy; Brink was the best player on the floor, despite shooting an uncharacteristically low 5/13 (38%). And on many of the misses, she grabbed her own rebound and scored or was fouled anyways. Still, Ole Miss played very physically and it affected both our ability to get the ball to her effectively as well as her ability to finish. I think it was a combination of some residual weakness from her GI bug and the refs "letting them play"; she definitely would have benefitted from a more tightly called game.
Ultimately, as a team we were vulnerable to physical defenses, and that's what we ran into last night.
Random thought: in our national title year two years ago, we were down quite a bit to Louisville (38-26 at the half), and Prechtel stepped up and sparked a comeback. We then had one point wins against South Carolina and Arizona. We could have come short in any of those games and lamented the disappointment. Conversely, we could have been bailed out by a reach in foul against Ole Miss last night and held on for the improbable comeback. At this level, many of the games hinge on a play here or a judgment call there, and the difference between a bitterly disappointing end of year and a triumphant championship is a knives edge. This year, it wasn't meant to be.
BC
Zone is probably the wrong defense for a team that shot 45% from 3.
The game was largely decided because we were out rebounded 44-39 and had 21 turnovers. Except for our three point defense, we actually did ok on the defensive end, holding the Rebels to under 30% shooting (19/64). The issue is that because of the 20 offensive rebounds and 21 Stanford turnovers, they had 12 more shots than we did (64-52).
Many of those turnovers happened specifically because we were trying to feed Brink. You can't really fault the strategy; Brink was the best player on the floor, despite shooting an uncharacteristically low 5/13 (38%). And on many of the misses, she grabbed her own rebound and scored or was fouled anyways. Still, Ole Miss played very physically and it affected both our ability to get the ball to her effectively as well as her ability to finish. I think it was a combination of some residual weakness from her GI bug and the refs "letting them play"; she definitely would have benefitted from a more tightly called game.
Ultimately, as a team we were vulnerable to physical defenses, and that's what we ran into last night.
Random thought: in our national title year two years ago, we were down quite a bit to Louisville (38-26 at the half), and Prechtel stepped up and sparked a comeback. We then had one point wins against South Carolina and Arizona. We could have come short in any of those games and lamented the disappointment. Conversely, we could have been bailed out by a reach in foul against Ole Miss last night and held on for the improbable comeback. At this level, many of the games hinge on a play here or a judgment call there, and the difference between a bitterly disappointing end of year and a triumphant championship is a knives edge. This year, it wasn't meant to be.
BC