[PalmTree]

Since the year 2000, LSJU played in three NC games, scoring 47, 48 (vs. Uconn) and 54 points (1 NC). 

LSJU appeared in six other Final 4s since 2000, scoring 58 points (vs. Uconn), 53 (vs. So. Caro), 56 (vs UConn), 47 (vs. Baylor), 62 (vs. Tex A&M), 64 (vs. UConn).

UConn has played in 11 NC games since 2000 and won them all, scoring 71, 82, 73, 70, 76, 53 (vs. LSJU), 93, 79, 63, 82, and 82 points.

Better players, better offensive schemes, or just consistently better gameday performances?

Better players and better coaches (who devise better offensive schemes). I view "better gameday performances" as an effect of better coaches coaching better players. 

Question (without a definitive answer): if Demetre or Bosgana had played for Geno this past year (after being on the UConn team for two or three years before that) would that player have had a significantly better '24-'25 season than she did (6.3ppg for BD, 6.7ppg for EB)? I would guess that she likely would have. Why? Because Geno does a great job of disciplining, conditioning, and building up the confidence, determination, grit, and resilience of his players.

I'm not sure where you're getting your figures. The Stanford official individual stats show that Bosgana was the second leading scorer/rebounder (12.2 ppg/6.4 reg) and Demetre averaged 10.0 ppg/4.3 rebounds per game

I don't agree with this for two reasons. First, both Bosgana and Demetre had double-double games this year - so they can score and have the ability to do so. Bosgana has had some concentration problems on defense, so maybe Gino would have helped with that. Demetre's game is more suited to playing at 3 or 4, but she had to play the 5 most of the time - and I thought she improved playing the post as the year went on. Her problem is, as an undersized post, she got in foul trouble. And her strength is her outside shooting - not as useful in the post.  I've seen them all 4 years and I think they both had their best season this year.

Second, I don't know if Gino could get a lot more out them -but I don't think they are as talented as the players that Gino already has (and he has many top 5 players on his team) and I don't think they would have gotten off the bench.

Are you suggesting that the Stanford coaching staff isn't good at developing players?

1. Your are correct; the figures I cited were incorrect. My bad.  
2. "I don't agree with this for two reasons." I don't know exactly what the "this" is with which you disagree. Obviously both players scored in double figures multiple times this year, hence had the clear capability of doing so. To me, the interesting questions are ones of level and consistency. 
3. For whatever reason or reasons, I don't think that in the '24-'25 season either player reached the highest level of development -- gauged by scoring and defense level and overall consistency of play -- of which she is capable.  
4. Am I "suggesting" that the Stanford coaching staff "isn't good at developing players?" So far I haven't seen much evidence that this coaching staff is impressively good at developing its players. (Clardy is arguably the best counterexample to this notion.) More generally, I'm not persuaded that the coaching staff, through its decisions and development work, got the most out of the talent it had onboard. Perhaps you think that the coaching staff got the most out of the talent it had, but that the problem was that because of recruiting and transfers, the staff had only modest talent to work with. There may be elements of truth in both viewpoints.

In re your #4, there are some critical skills/abilities that seem to me very difficult for <any> staff to help players develop/improve on - these being foot speed, fast-twitch reaction and ability to create, or help to create, shots. The first two are more innate physical abilities that IMHO, are probably the most limiting for a player.  The last is the more coachable, but is somewhat dependent on a player's developing aptitude/skills for quick reads, fast-twitch reaction to the situation and decent situational ball handling/movement ability.  Add consistency on top of these. Bottom line, I think we got as much as we could from our players in the high-tempo ACC.

Pre-game prep/game-planning, in-game adjustments and player mental/mindset coaching are to me, different issues.

[PalmTree]

Since the year 2000, LSJU played in three NC games, scoring 47, 48 (vs. Uconn) and 54 points (1 NC). 

LSJU appeared in six other Final 4s since 2000, scoring 58 points (vs. Uconn), 53 (vs. So. Caro), 56 (vs UConn), 47 (vs. Baylor), 62 (vs. Tex A&M), 64 (vs. UConn).

UConn has played in 11 NC games since 2000 and won them all, scoring 71, 82, 73, 70, 76, 53 (vs. LSJU), 93, 79, 63, 82, and 82 points.

Better players, better offensive schemes, or just consistently better gameday performances?

Better players and better coaches (who devise better offensive schemes). I view "better gameday performances" as an effect of better coaches coaching better players. 

Question (without a definitive answer): if Demetre or Bosgana had played for Geno this past year (after being on the UConn team for two or three years before that) would that player have had a significantly better '24-'25 season than she did (6.3ppg for BD, 6.7ppg for EB)? I would guess that she likely would have. Why? Because Geno does a great job of disciplining, conditioning, and building up the confidence, determination, grit, and resilience of his players.

I'm not sure where you're getting your figures. The Stanford official individual stats show that Bosgana was the second leading scorer/rebounder (12.2 ppg/6.4 reg) and Demetre averaged 10.0 ppg/4.3 rebounds per game

I don't agree with this for two reasons. First, both Bosgana and Demetre had double-double games this year - so they can score and have the ability to do so. Bosgana has had some concentration problems on defense, so maybe Gino would have helped with that. Demetre's game is more suited to playing at 3 or 4, but she had to play the 5 most of the time - and I thought she improved playing the post as the year went on. Her problem is, as an undersized post, she got in foul trouble. And her strength is her outside shooting - not as useful in the post.  I've seen them all 4 years and I think they both had their best season this year.

Second, I don't know if Gino could get a lot more out them -but I don't think they are as talented as the players that Gino already has (and he has many top 5 players on his team) and I don't think they would have gotten off the bench.

Are you suggesting that the Stanford coaching staff isn't good at developing players?

1. Your are correct; the figures I cited were incorrect. My bad.  
2. "I don't agree with this for two reasons." I don't know exactly what the "this" is with which you disagree. Obviously both players scored in double figures multiple times this year, hence had the clear capability of doing so. To me, the interesting questions are ones of level and consistency. 
3. For whatever reason or reasons, I don't think that in the '24-'25 season either player reached the highest level of development -- gauged by scoring and defense level and overall consistency of play -- of which she is capable.  
4. Am I "suggesting" that the Stanford coaching staff "isn't good at developing players?" So far I haven't seen much evidence that this coaching staff is impressively good at developing its players. (Clardy is arguably the best counterexample to this notion.) More generally, I'm not persuaded that the coaching staff, through its decisions and development work, got the most out of the talent it had onboard. Perhaps you think that the coaching staff got the most out of the talent it had, but that the problem was that because of recruiting and transfers, the staff had only modest talent to work with. There may be elements of truth in both viewpoints.

In re your #4, there are some critical skills/abilities that seem to me very difficult for <any> staff to help players develop/improve on - these being foot speed, fast-twitch reaction and ability to create, or help to create, shots. The first two are more innate physical abilities that IMHO, are probably the most limiting for a player.  The last is the more coachable, but is somewhat dependent on a player's developing aptitude/skills for quick reads, fast-twitch reaction to the situation and decent situational ball handling/movement ability.  Add consistency on top of these. Bottom line, I think we got as much as we could from our players in the high-tempo ACC.

Pre-game prep/game-planning, in-game adjustments and player mental/mindset coaching are to me, different issues.