PDA

View Full Version : WBB: Duke at UConn



wandalee
01-20-2013, 09:18 PM
So the women play Monday night at UConn. Gametime is 7:00 on ESPN2. We've got a great team this year. I just hope they have the confidence needed to win at Storrs.

GO DUKE!

uh_no
01-20-2013, 09:46 PM
So the women play Monday night at UConn. Gametime is 7:00 on ESPN2. We've got a great team this year. I just hope they have the confidence needed to win at Storrs.

GO DUKE!

I'll be honest, I think the duke team is pretty good, but I think they're going to lose by a wide margin.

Uconn has played 7 ranked opponents, and won all of them by 14+ but for the 1 point loss to ND. All their other games have been 20+ point wins.

Duke, to be fair, has a 14 point win over cal in the only game they have played against a ranked team. They have yet to play any of the top teams (stanford, baylor, ND, Uconn) and monday's game is their only such game....so they are a bit of an unknown.

If we look at numbers: uconn has scored 4 more points a game and given up 4 fewer points a game against a vastly surperior schedule than has duke. Connecticut has held their opponents to <30% shooting on the year....that does not bode well for a duke team that has succumbed to uconn's defense in the past.

For the first time this year, Ewill will run into not one, but two other elite players, and I you don't have to look past what Stephanie Dolson did to Cheney Ogwumike last month (6-22 shooting) to think that she may have difficulty scoring easily. Further, With multiple options down low, uconn effectively has more fouls to give, meaning foul trouble is more likely to be a problem for Duke than for uconn.

My analysis is mostly qualitative, though. I've watched Uconn a good deal, and Duke a fair bit. Duke's trademark is changing defenses. This has slowed uconn down in the past, and with a team that is once again scoring at will against most teams, I'm not sure much will be different this year. Duke has put up a lot of points against a lot of very lackluster competition this far, The question is what happens when they finally hit a defense as formidable as connecticut's?

Perhaps my argument there is not sound...as i'm basically saying "uconn will win because they always win"...and you'd be right to criticize that....but the question is, is duke a substantially different team than last year? I would argue that other than being another year older, they are not. Is uconn substantially different from last year? They grew another year older, yes, like duke, but they also added a 6'4 player averaging 15 & 7, while shooting 32% from 3 point land.

Uconn beat duke in cameron last year by 16. I'm not sure how the margin could be much closer this year in storrs.

That all said, I hope for a good game....seeing teams overmatched teams getting blown out isn't very enjoyable.

Best of luck to Coach P and her team.

roywhite
01-20-2013, 10:22 PM
Seems to me that Duke can improve their performance against UConn vs last year:

More experience overall
Another good ball handler in the lineup in Alexis Jones, to help handle the UConn defensive pressure

Does this give them enough to win?
Probably not, though I expect a competitive game.

Edit to add:
Game notes from goduke.com (http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?SPSID=22760&SPID=1846&DB_LANG=C&ATCLID=206038364&DB_OEM_ID=4200)

Interesting to see that Duke is shooting 43.2% from 3-pt, while UConn is shooting 37.0%, but takes considerably more threes.

burnspbesq
01-21-2013, 12:06 AM
The key to whether Duke wins tomorrow is the performance of ... wait for it ... Haley Peters.

Peters is the only true "stretch 4" in the women's game. She can be a major matchup problem for UConn. If Dolson tries to guard her, she will drag Dolson outside, which will do two things: (a) open the lane for EWill to operate against Stewart, who is not as good a post defender, and (b) expose Dolson's lack of perimeter defensive ability, potentially leading to early foul trouble. If Stewart tries to guard her, she's going to have to guard her beyond the three-point line, and I like EWill's chances against Dolson with no help (Mosqueda-Lewis will not be helping off Liston, for obvious reasons).

The other big matchup advantage for Duke: Bria Hartley cannot guard Chelsea Gray. Period, full stop.

I'm not guaranteeing a win. But I think it's a real possibility. This Duke team has matchup advantages that it can exploit. The last time that happened was in 2004, when UConn had nobody who could guard Alana Beard when she decided to take over the game. We know what happened in 2004.

uh_no
01-21-2013, 12:31 AM
The key to whether Duke wins tomorrow is the performance of ... wait for it ... Haley Peters.

Peters is the only true "stretch 4" in the women's game. She can be a major matchup problem for UConn. If Dolson tries to guard her, she will drag Dolson outside, which will do two things: (a) open the lane for EWill to operate against Stewart, who is not as good a post defender, and (b) expose Dolson's lack of perimeter defensive ability, potentially leading to early foul trouble. If Stewart tries to guard her, she's going to have to guard her beyond the three-point line, and I like EWill's chances against Dolson with no help (Mosqueda-Lewis will not be helping off Liston, for obvious reasons).

The other big matchup advantage for Duke: Bria Hartley cannot guard Chelsea Gray. Period, full stop.


Dolson will guard Ewill...Stanford thought Dolson couldn't guard their center....that didn't work out so well for Cheney and Stanford. Further, seeing as Ewill went 3-15 against dolson last year, what makes you think she will fare significantly better this year? I would argue Dolson's improved defense at least equals any improvement of offense ewill has made. I'm not trying to knock her, just trying to understand where you're coming from, as evidence seems to point to dolson being quite adequate at guarding any center not named "griner"

Stewart will guard Haley. I'm not sure how you can say Haley is the only stretch 4 with Stewart shooting 32% from 3.....or maybe at 6'4 you don't consider her big enough to be a 4? Should she end up foul trouble, 6'2 morgan tuck would likely get the nod (or perhaps KML...but I think Haley may be too tall for her). You are absolutely correct though. Should Dolson end up on haley, she's in trouble...would end up fouling likely....given, she's mitigated that a bit since last year by getting in great shape and losing weight, but she's still not the most mobile player on the court...

Kelly Faris will guard Chelsea...not sure why you thought Bria Hartley would.

That all said, I'm not sure I see the matchup problems you think exist.

Duke has some good players. I think Uconn has the players to guard them. We'll see tomorrow.

MCFinARL
01-21-2013, 07:59 AM
Obviously a win would be spectacular, but I think I share Uh_No's general sense that UConn is likely still better than Duke. Given that the game is in Storrs, I'd be quite pleased if Duke keeps it relatively close, losing by 10 or fewer. That would, frankly, represent a lot of progress against the standard set by UConn and the other handful of teams that have been a rung above Duke for the last couple of years.

I do think this team is better than the last couple of Duke teams, if only because most of the players have an additional year of experience. But of course the same is true of the UConn lineup.

CameronBornAndBred
01-21-2013, 08:42 AM
I don't think Duke has a chance to pull out the victory, I know they do. But I also know that UCONN is not a team they can let get out to an early lead. The atmosphere is going to be very charged in Storrs tonight and the crowd can easily work against you. If we get down early like we have done in the past few UCONN games, it is so easy to get demoralized, which really can take the fight out of you. Keep it close, or better yet, build our own early lead, and this should be a very good game.
LGD!!!

TruBlu
01-21-2013, 08:47 AM
For those more in the know, what is our injury status for the game tonight?

DU82
01-21-2013, 10:45 AM
For those more in the know, what is our injury status for the game tonight?

Elizabeth is still fighting through her stress injury, but appears close to 100%.

Chloe Wells is still strugling to get back from her stress injury. She doesn't appear to be quite back to where she was last year. That's both the injury and a semester off.

Allison Vernerey is clearly bothered by her right elbow injury. She's regressed, in my opinion, from her sophomore year. She isn't playing anywhere near as much as last year, either. Her playing the point on the 1-2-2 zone was key down the stretch. (Tough for point guards to see over a mobile 6'5" defender.)

Amber Henson has not played this year because of her knee surgery last December (second surgery on the same knee she injured in high school.) She was being counted on to be the second big, behind Elizabeth.

Richa Jackson is making progress each game back from her ACL. STill rusty.

Katie Heckman, a freshman, had surgery for a knee injury (I think ACL) and will sit out the entire year. I don't think the coaches were counting on her for big minutes this year before the injury, though.

I think that covers the major injuries.

Keys to the game are not to let UConn into their heads. Tricia has to provide an outside threat, Elizabeth can't get three quick fouls as she did last year. Haley has to take advantage of her size (not height, size) against the freshman Stewart (I presume they'll match up.) She's stronger, she needs to not go into one of her funks. Lastly, mixing the defenses is great, but don't let UConn hit from outside early/often. IF they get up quickly, it's over.

uh_no
01-21-2013, 02:05 PM
Elizabeth is still fighting through her stress injury, but appears close to 100%.

Chloe Wells is still strugling to get back from her stress injury. She doesn't appear to be quite back to where she was last year. That's both the injury and a semester off.

Allison Vernerey is clearly bothered by her right elbow injury. She's regressed, in my opinion, from her sophomore year. She isn't playing anywhere near as much as last year, either. Her playing the point on the 1-2-2 zone was key down the stretch. (Tough for point guards to see over a mobile 6'5" defender.)

Amber Henson has not played this year because of her knee surgery last December (second surgery on the same knee she injured in high school.) She was being counted on to be the second big, behind Elizabeth.

Richa Jackson is making progress each game back from her ACL. STill rusty.

Katie Heckman, a freshman, had surgery for a knee injury (I think ACL) and will sit out the entire year. I don't think the coaches were counting on her for big minutes this year before the injury, though.

I think that covers the major injuries.

Keys to the game are not to let UConn into their heads. Tricia has to provide an outside threat, Elizabeth can't get three quick fouls as she did last year. Haley has to take advantage of her size (not height, size) against the freshman Stewart (I presume they'll match up.) She's stronger, she needs to not go into one of her funks. Lastly, mixing the defenses is great, but don't let UConn hit from outside early/often. IF they get up quickly, it's over.

I think the keys to the game for duke are:

a) get dolson in foul trouble
b) make uconn miss threes (see Uconn/ND game)
c) drive early, drive often (again, see uconn/ND)

Duke may be able to do these things and still not win, but If uconn is hitting threes, and Dolson is on her game, and duke is forced to throwing up closely guarded threes (which would probably go in at a fair clip anyway judging by duke's shooting this year), I don't think duke can win.

CameronBornAndBred
01-21-2013, 07:07 PM
Since snrub is always empty for the women, feel free to join us in Section 21 for chat.
http://crazietalk.net/ourhouse/chat/

Just pick a username, leave password blank, no registration needed.

uh_no
01-21-2013, 07:12 PM
early impressions:

duke needs to do a better job finding connecticut's shooters....3 wide open 3s
duke needs to do a better job doing something early in the shot clock...they have dribbled around for 20 seconds and then only a few seconds left to do anything...leading to a bad shot

uh_no
01-21-2013, 07:19 PM
hit a couple threes and duke looks a lot better.

aside though: williams hasn't been able to get anything against dolson, nor dolson against williams....this might come down to a shootout.

DU82
01-21-2013, 07:21 PM
early impressions:

duke needs to do a better job finding connecticut's shooters....3 wide open 3s
duke needs to do a better job doing something early in the shot clock...they have dribbled around for 20 seconds and then only a few seconds left to do anything...leading to a bad shot

Taking time off the clock, shortening the game. Not the usual run and shoot. We have a better chance with a score in the 50s.

uh_no
01-21-2013, 07:26 PM
Taking time off the clock, shortening the game. Not the usual run and shoot. We have a better chance with a score in the 50s.

fair point, but when it doesn't seem to be leading to good shots, then there is an issue....it seems to be better now though

duke is 8-22 from the floor....it's only uconn's turnovers that are keeping duke in the game right now.

DU82
01-21-2013, 07:29 PM
fair point, but when it doesn't seem to be leading to good shots, then there is an issue....it seems to be better now though

I was about to say, then again, it too often results in poor shots at the buzzer.

I'm glad we're not trying to run with the Huskies, but we need better shots. Elizabeth is really struggling, with the VERY physical Dolson pounding her. (It's not a foul unless it's called, of course.)

uh_no
01-21-2013, 07:30 PM
I was about to say, then again, it too often results in poor shots at the buzzer.

I'm glad we're not trying to run with the Huskies, but we need better shots. Elizabeth is really struggling, with the VERY physical Dolson pounding her. (It's not a foul unless it's called, of course.)

welcome to uconn basketball :)

they are certainly not calling a lot, which is a welcome change for a lot of what you see in these games (after the travesty that was the reffing in the Uconn ND game...)

uh_no
01-21-2013, 07:35 PM
2 fouls on dolson...that's big

DU82
01-21-2013, 07:40 PM
2 fouls on dolson...that's big

Elizabeth then goes out for Allison, which allows Geno to take out Dolson. After the TV TO, hopefully Elizabeth will be back in to take advantage, assuming that Dolson doesn't come back in.

MCFinARL
01-21-2013, 07:41 PM
fair point, but when it doesn't seem to be leading to good shots, then there is an issue....it seems to be better now though

duke is 8-22 from the floor....it's only uconn's turnovers that are keeping duke in the game right now.

Well, yeah, but give Duke a little credit for causing some of those turnovers. One could also argue that, if Duke could shoot better, they would be leading by a few.

Not going to argue that, overall, Duke is as good a team as UConn, but they look a lot better in this game than I expected--and Alexis Jones is having a terrific game so far.

uh_no
01-21-2013, 07:48 PM
Well, yeah, but give Duke a little credit for causing some of those turnovers. One could also argue that, if Duke could shoot better, they would be leading by a few.

Not going to argue that, overall, Duke is as good a team as UConn, but they look a lot better in this game than I expected--and Alexis Jones is having a terrific game so far.

Absolutely. THey're hounding....maybe all but one or 2 of those turnovers are due to the pressure. Duke's poor shooting seems to be since they haven't had many clean looks all night....so one could argue the score is indicative of how the two teams are playing.

And yes, i didn't think it would be this close....duke is playing phenomenal defense....I should have thought about the turnovers more....thinking back to the ND game, uconn is often a bit sloppy....allowing the other team to convert pressure into turnovers....which duke is absolutely exploiting here.

what doesn't change, though, is that at times the duke offense has looked lost....they hit threes at a good clip, no doubt, and can take advantage of certain matchups in a lot of situations, but I think for the first time, their defense is strong enough that they can compensate for their in ability to create shots at times.

MCFinARL
01-21-2013, 08:04 PM
Absolutely. THey're hounding....maybe all but one or 2 of those turnovers are due to the pressure. Duke's poor shooting seems to be since they haven't had many clean looks all night....so one could argue the score is indicative of how the two teams are playing.

And yes, i didn't think it would be this close....duke is playing phenomenal defense....I should have thought about the turnovers more....thinking back to the ND game, uconn is often a bit sloppy....allowing the other team to convert pressure into turnovers....which duke is absolutely exploiting here.

what doesn't change, though, is that at times the duke offense has looked lost....they hit threes at a good clip, no doubt, and can take advantage of certain matchups in a lot of situations, but I think for the first time, their defense is strong enough that they can compensate for their in ability to create shots at times.

Yeah, that is a fair point. UConn hasn't always executed well against the pressure, but they have usually looked like they knew what they were trying to do. Not sure I could say the same for Duke.

uh_no
01-21-2013, 08:11 PM
Yeah, that is a fair point. UConn hasn't always executed well against the pressure, but they have usually looked like they knew what they were trying to do. Not sure I could say the same for Duke.

I have to give duke credit, though, they're playing a lot better than they have in years against uconn....like night and day...and a few bounces go their way, and they could come out here undefeated

Duvall
01-21-2013, 08:19 PM
Rebecca Lobo not covering herself in glory tonight.

uh_no
01-21-2013, 08:21 PM
Rebecca Lobo not covering herself in glory tonight.

Does she ever? great player....not a great commentator....

MCFinARL
01-21-2013, 08:24 PM
I have to give duke credit, though, they're playing a lot better than they have in years against uconn....like night and day...and a few bounces go their way, and they could come out here undefeated

Alas, though, the bounces seem to be going the other way. Seems like Geno had an effective halftime speech.

uh_no
01-21-2013, 08:29 PM
Alas, though, the bounces seem to be going the other way. Seems like Geno had an effective halftime speech.

Duke is a bit frustrated.....and that's not where you want to be against uconn. I'm not sure they have the offensive ability to get them out of this....especially with how uconn has played on the offensive end this half. But things can change....hit a few threes....

Duvall
01-21-2013, 08:29 PM
Breanna Stewart is shady as hell.

ChrisP
01-21-2013, 08:31 PM
I missed the first half but...Duke is just playing embarrassingly bad right now. Horrible defense and some really questionable decisions on the offensive end. I will admit that I don't watch a ton of women's hoops, but I swear, I see the Duke women miss more layups and just make so many unforced errors that it drives me nuts! I don't see the other top teams doing that stuff. Of course, UConn shooting like 156% in the second half isn't helping :(

Duvall
01-21-2013, 08:34 PM
I missed the first half but...Duke is just playing embarrassingly bad right now. Horrible defense and some really questionable decisions on the offensive end. I will admit that I don't watch a ton of women's hoops, but I swear, I see the Duke women miss more layups and just make so many unforced errors that it drives me nuts! I don't see the other top teams doing that stuff. Of course, UConn shooting like 156% in the second half isn't helping :(

Why would you make sweeping conclusions about a team you don't watch based on ten minutes of game action? That makes no sense.

uh_no
01-21-2013, 08:34 PM
Breanna Stewart is shady as hell.

Glad that the contribution you have made to this thread is that the commentator who went to the opposing school stinks, and an opposing player is "shady"

Solid analysis.

I'll take it that you haven't been able to find any real faults with uconn's play, then?

Duvall
01-21-2013, 08:35 PM
Has UConn been called for a foul since Geno's tantrum?

ChrisP
01-21-2013, 08:37 PM
Why would you make sweeping conclusions about a team you don't watch based on ten minutes of game action? That makes no sense.

Whenever I watch Duke women against other top teams, what I see is a team that gets rattled, seems to lack mental toughness, and misses easy shots. It's not just tonight - although they're not exactly proving me wrong right now. I realize I'm being very negative, but it's just so frustrating to see an undefeated team, ranked #4 in the nation, getting KILLED like this.

stals
01-21-2013, 08:39 PM
Duke just can't seem to get to the top echelon of WBB. Thought this year might be different.

uh_no
01-21-2013, 08:43 PM
Whenever I watch Duke women against other top teams, what I see is a team that gets rattled, seems to lack mental toughness, and misses easy shots. It's not just tonight - although they're not exactly proving me wrong right now. I realize I'm being very negative, but it's just so frustrating to see an undefeated team, ranked #4 in the nation, getting KILLED like this.

To be fair, duke is undefeated in part due to their lack of scheduling difficulty....it seems to happen every year that duke comes into these games with a gaudy record and then ends up not competing, especially on the offensive end (given they did alright for 20 minutes tonight).

If I were coach P, I'd get Stanford, ND, Baylor, and Connecticut on the schedule every year. You see those 4? they all play each-other seemingly every year. If duke wants to be as good as them, why don't they play them? Instead what you get is a duke team that beats up on lesser teams and then is in for a shock when they play uconn every year.

Play a tougher schedule! learn what you have to do when you run into a tough defense, or a team that moves the ball well. Only a few teams do these things at an extremely high level, and how is Duke going to learn to beat them if they don't play those teams as much as possible??? Instead you're exactly right....for the first time all year, they can't do whatever they want and they get rattled. It's a perfect observation. Why does K play great teams on neutral courts every year? because that what you need to do to get used to being in that situation. In one of his books, he talks about how you can games because you've won before and you know what it feels like and what you have to do. The duke women never have that opportunity. They get one shot a year, and they never get comfortable with it.

DU82
01-21-2013, 08:55 PM
To be fair, duke is undefeated in part due to their lack of scheduling difficulty....it seems to happen every year that duke comes into these games with a gaudy record and then ends up not competing, especially on the offensive end (given they did alright for 20 minutes tonight).

If I were coach P, I'd get Stanford, ND, Baylor, and Connecticut on the schedule every year. You see those 4? they all play each-other seemingly every year. If duke wants to be as good as them, why don't they play them? Instead what you get is a duke team that beats up on lesser teams and then is in for a shock when they play uconn every year

Stanford WAS on the schedule, replaced for two years by Cal, who beat Stanford last week. Stanford returns next year. ND, of course, will be on the schedule soon. Tennessee was a regular, until Pat got upset at the Crazies getting on one of her players for an off court item. Kentucky's was a home and home. Same with Texas A&M. The schedule has been there (other than Baylor). This is the first season the schedule's been lighter in a while.

MCFinARL
01-21-2013, 08:59 PM
To be fair, duke is undefeated in part due to their lack of scheduling difficulty....it seems to happen every year that duke comes into these games with a gaudy record and then ends up not competing, especially on the offensive end (given they did alright for 20 minutes tonight).

If I were coach P, I'd get Stanford, ND, Baylor, and Connecticut on the schedule every year. You see those 4? they all play each-other seemingly every year. If duke wants to be as good as them, why don't they play them? Instead what you get is a duke team that beats up on lesser teams and then is in for a shock when they play uconn every year.

Play a tougher schedule! learn what you have to do when you run into a tough defense, or a team that moves the ball well. Only a few teams do these things at an extremely high level, and how is Duke going to learn to beat them if they don't play those teams as much as possible??? Instead you're exactly right....for the first time all year, they can't do whatever they want and they get rattled. It's a perfect observation. Why does K play great teams on neutral courts every year? because that what you need to do to get used to being in that situation. In one of his books, he talks about how you can games because you've won before and you know what it feels like and what you have to do. The duke women never have that opportunity. They get one shot a year, and they never get comfortable with it.

To be fair, Duke played Notre Dame last year as well as ranked Kentucky, and ranked teams Kentucky, Xavier, and Texas A& M the year before. But you are right that the top 3-4 teams all seem to play each other every year, and that is really what it is going to take for Duke to get there. That and an improved offense. It seems that Coach P focuses on defense, and that has helped Duke to stay a consistently top-ten (really, a consistently top-eight) team. But they will need to be consistently strong on both sides of the court to get to the final four level.

uh_no
01-21-2013, 08:59 PM
Stanford WAS on the schedule, replaced for two years by Cal, who beat Stanford last week. Stanford returns next year. ND, of course, will be on the schedule soon. Tennessee was a regular, until Pat got upset at the Crazies getting on one of her players for an off court item. Kentucky's was a home and home. Same with Texas A&M. The schedule has been there (other than Baylor). This is the first season the schedule's been lighter in a while.

Good to know. I had actually wondered why that happened this year. Glad to know there is a reason. I think having ND in conference will absolutely challenge them more, and I think they will be a better team because of it.

And yeah, pat got her self out of Uconn, and then out of duke, and before she left, her team had fallen out of the national spotlight partly (in my opinion) to refusing to play against teams like that. (best wishes to Pat with her illness)

Duvall
01-21-2013, 09:00 PM
Whenever I watch Duke women against other top teams, what I see is a team that gets rattled, seems to lack mental toughness, and misses easy shots. It's not just tonight - although they're not exactly proving me wrong right now. I realize I'm being very negative, but it's just so frustrating to see an undefeated team, ranked #4 in the nation, getting KILLED like this.

Which games are you talking about? Be specific.

Anyway, Duke somehow manged to win 89 games and nine NCAA tournament games over the last three years, presumably without you watching. Perhaps you are a jinx?

arnie
01-21-2013, 09:03 PM
To be fair, duke is undefeated in part due to their lack of scheduling difficulty....it seems to happen every year that duke comes into these games with a gaudy record and then ends up not competing, especially on the offensive end (given they did alright for 20 minutes tonight).

If I were coach P, I'd get Stanford, ND, Baylor, and Connecticut on the schedule every year. You see those 4? they all play each-other seemingly every year. If duke wants to be as good as them, why don't they play them? Instead what you get is a duke team that beats up on lesser teams and then is in for a shock when they play uconn every year.

Play a tougher schedule! learn what you have to do when you run into a tough defense, or a team that moves the ball well. Only a few teams do these things at an extremely high level, and how is Duke going to learn to beat them if they don't play those teams as much as possible??? Instead you're exactly right....for the first time all year, they can't do whatever they want and they get rattled. It's a perfect observation. Why does K play great teams on neutral courts every year? because that what you need to do to get used to being in that situation. In one of his books, he talks about how you can games because you've won before and you know what it feels like and what you have to do. The duke women never have that opportunity. They get one shot a year, and they never get comfortable with it.

Or simply duck the good teams and pretend. Works until about the 3rd round of the tourney. Losing a half 47-19 to a similarly ranked opponent is usually hard to do.

uh_no
01-21-2013, 09:14 PM
Or simply duck the good teams and pretend. Works until about the 3rd round of the tourney. Losing a half 47-19 to a similarly ranked opponent is usually hard to do.

Well what the game shows is that the top 3 teams are baylor ND and uconn. I would have put stanford in there until there loss to cal (they beat baylor with baylors star guard Odyssey Simms out, combined with a 20 point loss to uconn and now a loss to cal). Duke had a chance to belong tonight, and I think they instead demonstrated they are on the wrong side of that divide right now.

That said, they may run the table in conference (their defense is that good) and get a one seed, and make the final four...but unless something changes between now and then, I'm not sure they'll win once they get there.....given that's a long time away, and they might learn a lot from tonight.

About the game itself.....tale of two halves...and what was the difference? turnovers

Duke stopped forcing turnovers and started committing them. As many as uconn committed in the first half, duke committed in the second half. The teams shot about the same each of the two halves. Further, duke got annihilated on the boards, 39-22...ouch.

I'm interested to see Coach P's quotes and see what she plans to work on after this game....but it seems year after year they fall into the same traps....and Coach P doesn't change much....it's always the mix up the defenses, play them all well, and shoot lots of threes hoping to get rebounds and putbacks...it allows them to kill lesser teams with peters and williams plus a horde of snipers from long range, but you combine a good opponent defense that can disrupt your flow as well as rebound at the same rate as you do....in the words of admiral ackbar, "it's a trap."

gumbomoop
01-21-2013, 09:17 PM
It's painful to watch my team play so poorly. Having said that, if I were a neutral fan, I would be so impressed and even thrilled by UConn's D, passing, and - the psychological [?] attribute I most value in sports - relentlessness. Even in the last 3 minutes, with the game well in hand, the UConn players were running hard, playing harassing D, and hustling - fiercely - for every loose ball.

Congrats to UConn for a beautiful 2d half. Here's to never forgetting, and thus to learning. Here's to Kelly Faris's relentlessness, above all.

CameronBornAndBred
01-21-2013, 09:38 PM
poop

gumbomoop
01-21-2013, 09:45 PM
poop

If directed at my post, I'm laughing with you, and at me - even though my post really wasn't poopy.

If directed at our team's play in the 2d half, it did stink. But only because UConn's work was so marvelous.

CameronBornAndBred
01-21-2013, 09:49 PM
If directed at my post, I'm laughing with you, and at me - even though my post really wasn't poopy.

If directed at our team's play in the 2d half, it did stink. But only because UConn's work was so marvelous.

Wasn't directed at anything or anyone, just a state of mind. So frustrating...a tale of two locker rooms at halftime. Something happened in one that obviously didn't happen in the other. So equal for 20 minutes, then two completely opposite directions. There could be a sports psychology thesis written about a game like that.

gumbomoop
01-21-2013, 09:54 PM
There could be a sports psychology thesis written about a game like that.

This is not just a throw-away line, but a very good point.

tieguy
01-21-2013, 10:45 PM
Which games are you talking about? Be specific.

OK, here goes. These are games against that year's #1 seeds, which is a pretty decent yardstick for "games against good teams":

2012-2013: (presumptive #1 seed) UConn- lose by 30.
2011-2012: ND, lose by 2; UConn, lose by 16, Stanford, lose by 12 (tourney).
2010-2011: UConn, lose by 36; UConn, lose by 35 (tourney).
2009-2010: Stanford, lose by 26; UConn, lose by 33.
2008-2009: (Duke is itself a #1 seed). Beat MD by 3, lose to MD by 18, lose to MD by 3.
2007-2008: Lose to MD by 15, lose to NC by 17, lose to Maryland by 7, lose to NC by 31, lose to NC by 13

So basically, after eliminating her first year (not her players):
- 11 games against #1 seeds
- 1 win (by three points), 10 losses
- 2 losses by single digits
- 5 losses by > 25 points

Average margin is around 19 points. (Eliminating the second year doesn't help matters, since that was her only win and one of the two close losses).

I've only personally attended one of those (the game at Stanford) but it was painfully awful to watch the offense, which has matched what I've seen on TV. The defense is always a thing of beauty, but the thing about basketball is that you have to be good at both ends of the court, and we consistently aren't.

It's not just the big games, and it's not just the eye test, either - I've run the numbers on the past several seasons, and last year was the first year since '06-'07 that the team scored above one point per possession for the season (just barely, at 1.046). Other top teams are consistently above 1.1 points per possession. In other words, we're consistently more than 10% worse per possession than other top teams on offense. That's a huge, consistent gap.

tieguy
01-21-2013, 11:35 PM
last year was the first year since '06-'07 that the team scored above one point per possession for the season (just barely, at 1.046). Other top teams are consistently above 1.1 points per possession. In other words, we're consistently more than 10% worse per possession than other top teams on offense.

Note that this year, even after today's debacle, we're at 1.077 points per possession. So things may be improving.

We're still far away from top teams like UConn, though (1.175 after today's game).

uh_no
01-22-2013, 12:29 AM
To speak a tad on my criticism of Coach P's scheduling

from an ESPN article on the game:


McCallie acknowledged more games of the sort Connecticut, Notre Dame, Baylor, Stanford and Tennessee regularly build their nonconference schedules around would have been beneficial, but suggested they weren't available.

"It's not as easy as you think." McCallie said. "Some teams won't play you, refuse to play you. And some teams say come play us, but we're not going to return. So it's not as easy as you think, unless we could get some help, maybe, from ESPN.

If ESPN were smart, what they'd do is take the top say 4-5 teams...whatever....maybe this year Uconn Baylor ND Stanford, and maybe Duke....ensure that they each play eachother once a year, and put them all on TV....it would be a good way to frame women's basketball for the masses "these are the games that matter...watch them"

Sort of the men's champions classic, but a full round robin over the course of the year.

I'd love it....I mean, think of the games that weren't even on TV this year....Stanford/Baylor....Uconn/ND.....some of the best games all year....call it something fancy....then at least you would get people who knew about more than just "uconn beats everybody" "that griner girl is good"...really, that's the extent that people know about the game....

oh well. Best of luck to coach P scheduling

I am, however disappointed in P's analysis of her offense....which was pretty much just that they missed some shots.....i mean...maybe she expects her players to make a turn around three out of a double team with hands in your face as the shot clock expires....shrug...but I would have hoped for a bit more about finding and taking good shots

tieguy
01-22-2013, 01:15 AM
I am, however disappointed in P's analysis of her offense....which was pretty much just that they missed some shots.....i mean...maybe she expects her players to make a turn around three out of a double team with hands in your face as the shot clock expires....shrug...but I would have hoped for a bit more about finding and taking good shots

After the UConn game two years ago, P said in post-game that Jaz "was left a little bit on an island today with not much help offensively." At some point I'd really like to hear P take some responsibility, and say things like "I, as coach, couldn't figure out how to get [star player] much help offensively." Granted that I don't listen to too much post-game stuff, so it is completely possible she does regularly take responsibility. But I certainly haven't heard it and it sounds like tonight wasn't much different.

tieguy
01-22-2013, 01:33 AM
And I should add that I don't think the scheduling thing is really a particularly valid excuse. Yes, it would be nice to play more top-flight opponents. But we have played at least #1 seed every year of the P era, usually two or three. So every non-freshman has experience playing multiple games against #1 seeds.

What is lacking is an offensive scheme that gets baskets against those opponents. No amount of experience is going to turn an offense that is merely average (or last year and this year very slightly above average) against normal opponents into a good offense against great opponents.

tieguy
01-22-2013, 02:58 AM
No amount of experience is going to turn an offense that is merely average (or last year and this year very slightly above average) against normal opponents into a good offense against great opponents.

So, after making this statement, I started doing a little more research. I finally got the guts to ask Ken Pomeroy about it, and he pointed me at the very useful wbbstate.com, which has per-possession stats for the women's game: http://www.wbbstate.com/stats.php?s=&c=&sw=teamP&st=ORating&split=

Turns out I've been making some bad assumptions about the distribution of scoring in the women's game. The top teams, like on the men's side, do average around 1.1 points per possession. But the distribution is very different. If you score 1.05 points per possession, you're tied for 51st on the men's side- in other words, you're good but not great. And I've been assuming for some time that this was similar on the women's side- 1.05 points per possession was solid, but not great.

In fact, 1.05 points per possession (what wbbstate says Duke is averaging this year) is tied for 5th in the women's game. So my claim that we're merely solid against most competition is wrong- we're way ahead of most everybody else, most of the time (even if it is still true that we're well behind the very top teams).

There are still serious problems here. Besides the gap against the top 1-3 teams, we've also played very far below average in big games over the past several years- points per possession of .6 aren't surprising when we play top teams. And we've regressed; we hit 1.12 in '05-'06, whereas last year was the first year a P-coached team had exceeded .99 points per game. And of course we badly fail the W-L test against other top teams, and often the eye test as well.

But I do retract some of my criticisms- the offense is, relative to the rest of the women's game, in much better shape than I had believed or understood. It's just not great- which is what is necessary to compete for a #1 seed and a legit chance at a title.

uh_no
01-22-2013, 03:13 AM
So, after making this statement, I started doing a little more research. I finally got the guts to ask Ken Pomeroy about it, and he pointed me at the very useful wbbstate.com, which has per-possession stats for the women's game: http://www.wbbstate.com/stats.php?s=&c=&sw=teamP&st=ORating&split=

Turns out I've been making some bad assumptions about the distribution of scoring in the women's game. The top teams, like on the men's side, do average around 1.1 points per possession. But the distribution is very different. If you score 1.05 points per possession, you're tied for 51st on the men's side- in other words, you're good but not great. And I've been assuming for some time that this was similar on the women's side- 1.05 points per possession was solid, but not great.

In fact, 1.05 points per possession (what wbbstate says Duke is averaging this year) is tied for 5th in the women's game. So my claim that we're merely solid against most competition is wrong- we're way ahead of most everybody else, most of the time (even if it is still true that we're well behind the very top teams).

There are still serious problems here. Besides the gap against the top 1-3 teams, we've also played very far below average in big games over the past several years- points per possession of .6 aren't surprising when we play top teams. And we've regressed; we hit 1.12 in '05-'06, whereas last year was the first year a P-coached team had exceeded .99 points per game. And of course we badly fail the W-L test against other top teams, and often the eye test as well.

But I do retract some of my criticisms- the offense is, relative to the rest of the women's game, in much better shape than I had believed or understood. It's just not great- which is what is necessary to compete for a #1 seed and a legit chance at a title.

Don't beat yourself up too hard, as I think there are two things at work here:

one: the overall parity in the women's game...extremely top heavy, and while duke may be near the top in offensive efficiency, they are not in the elite couple. So even if Duke did have a lackluster offense relative to baylor and uconn, which they do, they still better than a large part of the country.

second, and perhaps more importantly: there is a bit of a wisconsin effect going on. Duke has played a very soft schedule, and that as kenpom indicates, when you extremely outmatch your opponents, you oftentimes outperform your expected efficiency....and when you look at duke's schedule this year, they were very well positioned to take advantage of this. Ultimately, what it means is that there are very few games with which to judge the actually efficiency of a very good team, since most games end up being wisconsin effecting blowouts of other teams. What i'm trying to say is that duke's efficiency number may be more because they have had, say 15 cupcake opponents, whereas uconn and Baylor and ND have only played 10 (actual number of games may vary)....than it is because they are actually as efficient as ND is.

Either way, the listing of performances against top teams is really the kicker. What would be more interesting than overall efficiencies is efficiencies in those top games of say Duke, Uconn, Baylor, Stanford, and ND....that would be the most telling in seeing if duke has an "offensive" issue. Obviously since duke lost most of those games, it will be lower than their opponents....but how did duke do against those teams vs how did baylor or uconn do against those teams? THAT would give an extremely useful data point

tieguy
01-22-2013, 03:24 AM
Yeah, the wbbstate numbers make no effort (as best as I can see) to correct for strength of schedule. So obviously they have to be taken with a grain of salt. It is also early in the season- I assume they'll fall, even though the ACC is fairly weak this year. (I pine for the years when MD, UNC, and State were actually good, as long as they don't win a title.)

Still, that only carries you so far. Maybe we're actually top 10 offensively, rather than top 5, but the bottom line is that most days against most teams we're very good. And of course that against the top teams we consistently lay stinkers like today's.

roywhite
01-22-2013, 07:16 AM
Boxscore UConn 79 -- Duke 49 (http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?SPSID=22760&SPID=1846&DB_LANG=C&DB_OEM_ID=4200&ATCLID=206057760)

Rebounding 44 to 25
Chelsea Gray 1-6
Richa Jackson 1-6
Tricia Liston only 1 FG attempt

TruBlu
01-22-2013, 07:56 AM
I only watched the first half, and the first few minutes of the second half before shutting down the tv. Based on the second half minutes that I saw, and by looking at the box score, this is one heckuva teaching loss, if I can borrow that phrase from our neighbors down the road.

Here's hoping that this is just a bump in the road, and not a sign of things to come against quality teams for the rest of the year.

Congratulations to our team for being the last unbeaten (men or women) to get a loss.

Next play!

Mike Corey
01-22-2013, 08:33 AM
I don't have anything nice to say, so I'm not going to say anything at all.

But I will share Coach P's postgame tweet:


We have been consistent. Playing 20 minutes gets you beat. Rebounding does indeed win ball games. Being out hustled is the worst.

uh_no
01-22-2013, 09:43 AM
I don't have anything nice to say, so I'm not going to say anything at all.

But I will share Coach P's postgame tweet:

What bothers me about the tweet is that the focusing is on rebounding and hustle. Hustle, fine. But even if duke had rebounded on par with uconn, they probably STILL would have lost the game. You're not going to beat the other elite teams simply by rebounding well....they all rebound well....that's why they're elite.

Duke's offense is very much similar, at least from a high level, to the 2010 men...shoot threes get rebounds....but there doesn't seem to be much cohesion in getting those open threes....and it only works if your offensive rebounding is surperior.....Duke was consistently unable to get good looks, and fretting about rebounding is not going to change that.

Lid
01-22-2013, 09:58 AM
I watch nearly all of the Duke women's games either in person or online, but by a stroke of luck (apparently), I was busy and had to record yesterday's game. Not sure if I'll have the stomach to watch it. However, since it seems many of the people posting here have seen perhaps a few games (or maybe just this one this year?) and some stats websites, I thought I'd give my eyeball impressions of how the team has changed over P's tenure.

My gut feeling has been that the offense advanced quite a bit last season relative to previous years. (In fact, Local Yogurt had a promotion last year where all fans got free yogurt anytime Duke scored at least 75. They ended up paying out frequently, which I assume they didn't expect, and that promotion disappeared this year. Drat!) There were fewer missed layups, etc., than in the first few defense-only P years. Those skills seem to have regressed markedly the last few games, and we're seeing more missed put-backs, etc. Given that impression, I was interested in the stats tieguy has posted -- I think it all fits. Jones has brought a lot of energy and -- I'm searching for how to put this -- offensive aspiration, maybe? to the team. She's much more raw than Chelsea, but I, personally, like the fact that she's willing to go big. She doesn't play scared, so I wasn't suprised to see her stat line from yesterday. What I *was* shocked by were some of the other stats -- Haley with 3 rebounds? Liston with 1 shot? Chelsea with a 1:1 A/TO? Those definitely aren't numbers that would be associated with Duke playing its game (credit to UConn for not allowing Duke to play its game, but I'm really curious about Peters' rebounds, especially, and what led to that).

Like everyone else, I think it's clear that Duke is in a second tier (with relatively few peers, IMO) in WBB. When we've played top 25 teams not named Baylor, ND, UConn, we've done extremely well. When we've played non-top 25 teams, we've had the types of scores we should have had. I'd love to see us play the top teams every year and get used to playing them so we can lose the psychological part of whatever's going on and just have to deal with the basketball side. I'd also like fewer injuries for the team (when is Amber going to come back???), and a pony. I'm quite curious about P's scheduling statement -- would love to know who's not willing to return visits.


... even though the ACC is fairly weak this year. (I pine for the years when MD, UNC, and State were actually good, as long as they don't win a title.)

I'm curious if the ACC really is weaker. MD is fine (although also hurt by injuries, I believe), UNC is definitely much stronger this year than last year, and it seems as if State always plays us tough. FSU is ranked again, and I woudn't be too surprised to see Miami move up. There are no top-level teams, but again, there seem to be just the same 3-4 as always, so I don't know that it's a change this year. I'm very excited to have ND coming into the conference, and I won't miss seeing Brenda F. on the sidelines at all.

Lid
01-22-2013, 10:03 AM
Duke's offense is very much similar, at least from a high level, to the 2010 men...shoot threes get rebounds....but there doesn't seem to be much cohesion in getting those open threes....

Not sure this is totally accurate -- if I'm looking at the stats correctly, only 17% of their shots this year are threes. They drive quite a bit, and seeing Liston use her size to do so has been a nice surprise this year in general. Again, I didn't see yesterday's game, and it sounds like it was obviously different from what they've been doing the rest of the season. Just want to caution against assuming the way our offense looked yesterday is the way they've been working on offense in general.

Wander
01-22-2013, 10:13 AM
If you score 1.05 points per possession, you're tied for 51st on the men's side- in other words, you're good but not great. And I've been assuming for some time that this was similar on the women's side- 1.05 points per possession was solid, but not great.

In fact, 1.05 points per possession (what wbbstate says Duke is averaging this year) is tied for 5th in the women's game.

The thing is, you may still be right in a way. The gap between the 1st and 51st teams in men's basketball may actually be equivalent to the gap between the 1st and 5th teams in women's. The parity gap really is huge. I would never advocate this for any sport because it's idiotic no matter how you twist it around, but if you HAD to implement a BCS system to determine the champion of a sport, women's college basketball would probably be the sport where it's the least terrible.

tieguy
01-22-2013, 10:18 AM
I'm curious if the ACC really is weaker.

I was struck when going through the list of #1 seeds from the first half of the decade how often MD and Carolina were also #1 seeds. We've gone from being a conference that regularly had three teams competing to be #1 seeds to a conference with 2-3 teams competing to be #2 seeds. Part of that is just the ebb and flow of the game for every coach except K and Geno (even Tara has had down years), but regardless of the reason, it isn't the same.

roywhite
01-22-2013, 10:21 AM
By the way, tieguy, nice to have you back on the boards.

After going to your website, I see you've pretty much been goofing off over the last few years....good to see you talking hoops again. :)

tieguy
01-22-2013, 10:25 AM
By the way, tieguy, nice to have you back on the boards.

After going to your website, I see you've pretty much been goofing off over the last few years....good to see you talking hoops again. :)

Hah :) I wish I had more time/energy for it. It's really very sad that what it takes is for me to get angry over the offense :(

(I'm taking a new job in a few weeks, which hopefully will leave me with a little more time!)

-bdbd
01-22-2013, 10:45 AM
Yeah, the wbbstate numbers make no effort (as best as I can see) to correct for strength of schedule. So obviously they have to be taken with a grain of salt. It is also early in the season- I assume they'll fall, even though the ACC is fairly weak this year. (I pine for the years when MD, UNC, and State were actually good, as long as they don't win a title.)

Still, that only carries you so far. Maybe we're actually top 10 offensively, rather than top 5, but the bottom line is that most days against most teams we're very good. And of course that against the top teams we consistently lay stinkers like today's.

Hey Tie - good thoughts. But I think the SOS component is pretty important, and if your SOS is way lower than the top 4 teams, well then you're going to artificially inflate your record and your stats. Depending on how much truly weaker your opponents have been - note that it is a lot more than a "we played a top-5 team once in our sked;" it is about the collective strength of your whole slate - the statistical and record difference could be significant. I think last night was a good lesson in that.

I don't know what it is, but U-con just seems to have our women's number. I TIVO'd the game and watched it late last night, just before bedtime - boy, that didn't make going to sleep easy! But it was just amazing, after a very solid first half, the second was just horrible. It is one thing if you can say, well, the coach on the other side made a couple of adjustments that just worked a little better. But we just seemed to lose our compsure after the first 4 minutes or so. Some of it was just bad luck, as a couple of our early 2H shots just rimmed out, or calls didn't go our way, and U-con made a couple of "prayers." But we just showed no resillience after that and it simply snowballed. I was just hugely disappointed to see them lose their composure, once again, to U-con. Certainly give the home team all due props, but my reaction would be different if we'd kept fighting and simply lost to a better team on a hot night for them.

Coach P just didn't seem to know what to do to stop the avalanche. And, yes, our second-half Offense was just terrible. Repeatedly I was watching four girls standing still, watching their PG dribble the ball around the top of the key, until <8 seconds left on the shot clock and we'd then desperately run around and, ultimately, throw up a poor, low-percentage shot, frequently with nobody under the basket to rebound.

Maybe we're just spoiled on the Men's side, as K-coached teams ALWAYS show that intensity, usually for 40 full minutes. Not seeing the Duke WBB play with that same pride, heart, effort in the second half honestly worries me.

CameronBornAndBred
01-22-2013, 10:57 AM
I watch nearly all of the Duke women's games either in person or online, but by a stroke of luck (apparently), I was busy and had to record yesterday's game. Not sure if I'll have the stomach to watch it. .
Do watch the first half.



My gut feeling has been that the offense advanced quite a bit last season relative to previous years.
I think our offense has improved drastically. Chelsea Gray carries the burden of much of that improvement, she distributes the ball so well. And while it might not seem to be much, we are for the most part making our layups, which in the past frustrated me to no end that we missed so often from under the basket.

One quick note on this thread. It now has 4 pages. Where are all these posters when DWB wins?!

Lid
01-22-2013, 11:04 AM
Do watch the first half.
I think I will -- and probably the 2nd, I'm a junkie. Maybe I'll watch them in reverse order, though. :)



I think our offense has improved drastically. Chelsea Gray carries the burden of much of that improvement, she distributes the ball so well. And while it might not seem to be much, we are for the most part making our layups, which in the past frustrated me to no end that we missed so often from under the basket.
THIS. I've been sad to see the missed lay-ups in the last few games, because it's really felt like that was a huge part of our offensive leap forward. Chelsea is amazing, and the women have, in general, been finishing the buckets they should.

bird
01-22-2013, 12:10 PM
Do watch the first half.


I think our offense has improved drastically. Chelsea Gray carries the burden of much of that improvement, she distributes the ball so well. And while it might not seem to be much, we are for the most part making our layups, which in the past frustrated me to no end that we missed so often from under the basket.

One quick note on this thread. It now has 4 pages. Where are all these posters when DWB wins?!

Last night was the start of the season for me, as DWB hasn't been on TV much. Going forward, they are on TV a lot.

I kept thinking about Taurasi last night. Taurasi, Taurasi, and Taurasi, who took such a Laettner-like joy in stomping the other team. Duke has never gotten over Taurasi, IMO.

burnspbesq
01-22-2013, 12:57 PM
Really disappointing performance.

When we got punched in the mouth, we went down and stayed down. That's a failure of leadership, both on-court and sideline.

I've come to expect Tricia Liston to disappear in big games against elite defenses; she's just not quick enough to get herself open. But I was shocked to see Chelsea disappear, and Richa and Chloe fail to provide any spark off the bench. Of the juniors, only Haley played close to expectations.

The huge rebounding disparity is especially disappointing, because it's mostly due to being out-worked.

EWill got at least a standoff against Dolson, and Alexis played confident and fearless ball for a good chunk of the game. So there's that to build on.

So yet another 30-win, Elite Eight season that ultimately leaves a bad taste in one's mouth seems to be in prospect. Le heavy sigh.

TruBlu
01-22-2013, 01:25 PM
I think I will -- and probably the 2nd, I'm a junkie. Maybe I'll watch them in reverse order, though. :)


You might want to watch it completely in reverse. The game would start out with us trailing by a significant margin, and we would battle back to a tie at the end. (It might end up improving the narrative by the announcers, as well.)

-bdbd
01-22-2013, 01:42 PM
Really disappointing performance.

When we got punched in the mouth, we went down and stayed down. That's a failure of leadership, both on-court and sideline.

I've come to expect Tricia Liston to disappear in big games against elite defenses; she's just not quick enough to get herself open. But I was shocked to see Chelsea disappear, and Richa and Chloe fail to provide any spark off the bench. Of the juniors, only Haley played close to expectations.

The huge rebounding disparity is especially disappointing, because it's mostly due to being out-worked.

EWill got at least a standoff against Dolson, and Alexis played confident and fearless ball for a good chunk of the game. So there's that to build on.

So yet another 30-win, Elite Eight season that ultimately leaves a bad taste in one's mouth seems to be in prospect. Le heavy sigh.

Yes, E-Will played her about even, but could/should have done more (her going O-fer in the first 15 minutes didn't help). I had a real chuckle listening to the Color Commentator questioning the 4th foul call against Dolson. Coach Geno then goes ballistic, as usual, objecting to the foul that he couldn't even see, at the far end of the court... But they showed the replay and the commentator, a U-con grad of course, says "...then Dolson puts her hands straight up. Was that a foul?? I don't think so...." But the replay - I rewatched it on TIVO a couple of times - clearly showed Dolson hacking the Duke player on the lower arm while driving down the left side of the lane, just before she put up the shot,. Then Dolson lifts her arms straight up. Not sure which was funnier, the announcer comment or Geno's absurd reaction, with U-con up double-digits at the time.

Once Dolson went out I was saying, ok, E-Will, now show us what you got... But it didn't really happen for some reason, somewhat affected a lot by U-con repeatedly collapsing down on her.

While I generally am a Coach-P supporter, it IS fair to say that this wasn't her best game strategy-wise, or sideline/motivational-wise, and she WAS outcoached, I have to say, by Auriemma. But I still really, really dislike the man. :mad:

Side note: That call/sequence excepted, the TV commentary was, overall, not unreasonable.

miramar
01-22-2013, 01:43 PM
If ESPN were smart, what they'd do is take the top say 4-5 teams...whatever....maybe this year Uconn Baylor ND Stanford, and maybe Duke....ensure that they each play eachother once a year, and put them all on TV....it would be a good way to frame women's basketball for the masses "these are the games that matter...watch them"

Sort of the men's champions classic, but a full round robin over the course of the year.



Perhaps a December weekend, something like the Big 10/ACC challenge, but for top women's programs rather than specific leagues. If they did it between Christmas and New Years there wouldn't be any big time men's games to compete with.