|
|
Post by beavershoopsfan on Feb 18, 2020 10:33:28 GMT -8
We got no shots up in the last 2:37 of regulation. It almost keeps me up at night so I can't imagine what this is doing to the coaches and players. Mostly true. Washington tied up the score at 67 with 2:26 remaining to play after receiving a good pass from Goodman. Then, three turnovers on our final three possessions in regulation. Two were on deflected passes and the final one was a travel when Slocum should have shot instead of kicking the ball out to a teammate. |
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Feb 18, 2020 10:54:07 GMT -8
Turnovers are a chronic problem.They can be and should be coached up !Why is this such a lingering negative ? From what I saw last night (only watched the second half), the majority of our turnovers didn't come from being careless with the ball, they came from being unable to get any separation from the defenders and passers were faced with passing to a covered player or taking a 5 second call. There were simply not many passes to be made yesterday because girls were blanketed. It's why we got so many driving lanes to the hoop. I also thought we missed Jones inside way too often. There were times she had position and an entry pass simply wasn't made. Best way to alleviate pressure on the perimeter is to dump it inside. I remember one possession where Washington had the ball at the 3 point line, picked up her dribble, and everyone just stood motionless. Didn't even attempt to break free from a defender, as if they knew they weren't going to be able to anyways. I think MW ended up throwing a lob back towards half court to Mik or Destiny I forget which, and we were able to avoid a turnover just barely, but the shot clock was almost drained and we ended up getting a forced look out of that possession. |
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Feb 18, 2020 11:03:10 GMT -8
Turnovers are a chronic problem.They can be and should be coached up !Why is this such a lingering negative ? As I've mentioned before... outsider who has the unpleasant/pleasant experience of coaching a team similar to this team's characteristic... CHEMISTRY. YOu have tons of talent.... HAPPY... but can't get them to play together to optimize the team... extremely FRUSTRATING! Both players and coaches know they can be better, yet it feels like you're forcing the proverbial square peg into the round hole. SOmetimes the harder they try the worse it gets. OSU has talented players. They have a Great HC/Staff. The players seem to truly like one another. But, if you watch them they do not have a cohesiveness that is consistent. The ball is always stopping... pass or dribble... players not sure where a teammate is going or suppose to be. There seems to be a consistent hesitation on whether to make a play. Typically that hesitation is a forced pass, shot, or a shot that is not taken. Look many here jumped on the Final 4 train very early. When SR said something like "why not us?", some fans took it to heart without being realistic. But, of course many also still thought Jelena was coming to help... without ever seeing her play vs this level of competition. Then TC is hurt and the team goes 12-0, but still no Jelena, but still hope she was coming. I think fans oversold this team from the beginning. There were so many question marks and the all had to come up just right for OSU to be that kind of team. BUT, to me this team NEVER had the talent, experience, depth to be a F4 team... it just didn't, TC or KB injuries or not. BUT, that was my opinion early and based on how the team played together in spurts vs inferior competition to what they see in Pac12 teams. There was great team play followed by individuals taking over sections of games and others standing, watching. There was never a cohesive unit on any consistent basis, 24 point quarter, 10 point quarter stuff. Now that opinion is not shared by most here... and will be argued still by some trying to extrapolate what could of been. So, to me, the turnovers are more pronounced in that they come from unforced errors more than ever. Too much dribble, trying to beat pressure alone, getting trapped, no player movement, passes to where a player is thought to be, over passing and shots against the clock. They are not coming from intricate passes running the offense so to speak. It is also far more painful to some that jumped on to the F4 train and saw it slide from reality. Good team, not great. 20 win team, not upper level Pac12 team. NCAA team, not much further than S16 if that. Down year, but not disappointing... to me. The writing was sort of on the wall early, and TC's injury greatly reduce the talented depth. And, then KB and the depth up front was almost nonexistent. |
|
|
|
Post by nwhoopfan on Feb 18, 2020 12:31:25 GMT -8
I'm still holding out hope for 10-8. So do you have them losing @ Cal, or losing to one of the Washington schools in Corvallis? Either would be pretty bad. 10-8 is realistic. Not again will Aleah play 30+ minutes without scoring. She’s due for at least a mini-explosion. But Lordy I hope that the TO situation v. Cal and the WA schools at least settles down to ‘bad’ (as opposed to ‘horrible’). I'm not sure about Cal and WSU, but UW forces a lot of TOs. Beavs will have to make a concerted effort to hang onto the ball.
edit--although UW is generous and often give the ball right back
|
|
|
|
Post by green85 on Feb 18, 2020 12:42:30 GMT -8
Turnovers are a chronic problem.They can be and should be coached up !Why is this such a lingering negative ? As I've mentioned before... outsider who has the unpleasant/pleasant experience of coaching a team similar to this team's characteristic... CHEMISTRY. YOu have tons of talent.... HAPPY... but can't get them to play together to optimize the team... extremely FRUSTRATING! Both players and coaches know they can be better, yet it feels like you're forcing the proverbial square peg into the round hole. SOmetimes the harder they try the worse it gets. OSU has talented players. They have a Great HC/Staff. The players seem to truly like one another. But, if you watch them they do not have a cohesiveness that is consistent. The ball is always stopping... pass or dribble... players not sure where a teammate is going or suppose to be. There seems to be a consistent hesitation on whether to make a play. Typically that hesitation is a forced pass, shot, or a shot that is not taken. Look many here jumped on the Final 4 train very early. When SR said something like "why not us?", some fans took it to heart without being realistic. But, of course many also still thought Jelena was coming to help... without ever seeing her play vs this level of competition. Then TC is hurt and the team goes 12-0, but still no Jelena, but still hope she was coming. I think fans oversold this team from the beginning. There were so many question marks and the all had to come up just right for OSU to be that kind of team. BUT, to me this team NEVER had the talent, experience, depth to be a F4 team... it just didn't, TC or KB injuries or not. BUT, that was my opinion early and based on how the team played together in spurts vs inferior competition to what they see in Pac12 teams. There was great team play followed by individuals taking over sections of games and others standing, watching. There was never a cohesive unit on any consistent basis, 24 point quarter, 10 point quarter stuff. Now that opinion is not shared by most here... and will be argued still by some trying to extrapolate what could of been. So, to me, the turnovers are more pronounced in that they come from unforced errors more than ever. Too much dribble, trying to beat pressure alone, getting trapped, no player movement, passes to where a player is thought to be, over passing and shots against the clock. They are not coming from intricate passes running the offense so to speak. It is also far more painful to some that jumped on to the F4 train and saw it slide from reality. Good team, not great. 20 win team, not upper level Pac12 team. NCAA team, not much further than S16 if that. Down year, but not disappointing... to me. The writing was sort of on the wall early, and TC's injury greatly reduce the talented depth. And, then KB and the depth up front was almost nonexistent. "Look many here jumped on the Final 4 train very early. When SR said something like "why not us?", some fans took it to heart without being realistic. But, of course many also still thought Jelena was coming to help... without ever seeing her play vs this level of competition. Then TC is hurt and the team goes 12-0, but still no Jelena, but still hope she was coming. I think fans oversold this team from the beginning. There were so many question marks and the all had to come up just right for OSU to be that kind of team. " I am trying to parse this to understand your point ... and I get confused. You mention what people "thought would happen" before the season. You mention a comment from Coach SR about "why not us?", and connect it to the type of expectation for success. So, in that circumstance at that time - believing Jelena would play, that Corsdale would play, K. Brown would play it seems you almost admit that there was fair reason for hope and to take Coach SR's comments as a sign of hope for the team. So I cannot see how the team's potential was oversold or that there really were so many question marks that those hopes were not justified. From this outside view (and looking back to that preseason time period) I believed the Beavers would be Pac12 title contenders. So I cannot get behind a statement that OSU "never had the talent and depth" to meet those expectations. Now the reality today is that several key pieces to that preseason team are not playing. That those players are not filling roles in Coach Rueck's game plan means adjustments have to be made. Unfortunately, those adjustments are happening in the midst of a gauntlet of the Pac12 season. Add those things together and you can find players that make a few mistakes (traveling, bad pass, reach-in foul) - and those mistakes are added to playing tough competition that is also pressuring and making defensive plays - and you end up with some bigger numbers on the turnover side. Maybe this year's OSU women's basketball team won't make the NCAA Final Four ... but that does not mean that any Beaver fan was wrong about setting those expectations in the preseason. |
|
|
|
Post by grad1973 on Feb 18, 2020 13:19:41 GMT -8
Totally disagree with this team sliding. Nobody gets a break at UCLA.
We did better then other times with less ht.
|
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Feb 18, 2020 14:31:17 GMT -8
Totally disagree with this team sliding. Nobody gets a break at UCLA. We did better then other times with less ht. This is a good point. We took the #3 team in the country to overtime in their building and people are acting like the season's over. |
|
|
|
Post by beavershoopsfan on Feb 18, 2020 15:12:30 GMT -8
Totally disagree with this team sliding. Nobody gets a break at UCLA. We did better then other times with less ht. This is a good point. We took the #3 team in the country to overtime in their building and people are acting like the season's over. UCLA is the #8 team now. But, I appreciate your point. The Beavs could have won the game in regulation with less turnovers, one more made free throw, or a break on a 50/50 call. That the team was up 14 in the third quarter makes the final outcome of the game bitter to swallow. |
|
|
|
Post by beavershoopsfan on Feb 18, 2020 15:54:12 GMT -8
I agree with rafer that the Beavs look very tight and would benefit from running in transition and getting some easier points. Would love to see the players smiling again.
I believe the announcers noted that the Beavs had three points in transition last night. That is the sign of a team that has been conditioned to slow it up and look to their coach for nearly every play call on offense.
|
|
|
|
Post by gnawitall on Feb 18, 2020 16:19:53 GMT -8
Haven't read all the posts but the slow tempo sounds like a rushing football team shortening the game by using clock. Maybe that's a Rueck strategy.
|
|
|
|
Post by beaveragain on Feb 18, 2020 16:40:49 GMT -8
All of OSU's loses have been by a couple of baskets except against the Ducks in Eugene. To think that Taya would not have been able to make the difference of a couple of baskets seems odd to me. So going on about how there needs to be a complete change in offense, player types etc......
The Beav's just haven't been able to finish the games. I think right now that Mik is trying to carry the team on her back and she just isn't that kind of player, and she ends up fouling out. Combined Aleah and Kat took six shots. The scoring needs to be more spread out. And hit the freaking FT's.
|
|
|
|
Post by beavershoopsfan on Feb 18, 2020 17:05:33 GMT -8
All of OSU's loses have been by a couple of baskets except against the Ducks in Eugene. To think that Taya would not have been able to make the difference of a couple of baskets seems odd to me. So going on about how there needs to be a complete change in offense, player types etc...... The Beav's just haven't been able to finish the games. I think right now that Mik is trying to carry the team on her back and she just isn't that kind of player, and she ends up fouling out. Combined Aleah and Kat took six shots. The scoring needs to be more spread out. And hit the freaking FT's. Would have preferred to see both Tudor and Goodman take more shots yesterday. Part of the challenge in getting them more shots is that UCLA defenders were playing them tightly and daring them to drive. Aleah did so once in the first half and missed a layin. Kat had a nice up and under move in the second half but left her layup just short. Goodman was also given a good pass in the second quarter for an open three-pointer, but she was standing on the sideline when she caught the pass for a turnover. Against a tightly-defending team like UCLA, you have to be able to drive to make the defense pay. Tudor and Goodman shoot primarily threes and the stats clearly show that. As a result, opposing defenses feel comfortable smothering them and dare them to put the ball on the floor via a drive. |
|
|
|
Post by beaverstever on Feb 18, 2020 17:32:36 GMT -8
Jas outplayed Aleah and Kat in fewer minutes, at least in terms of measured contributions. She has the physical tools to counter athletic teams.
On the TOs, our team assist/TO ratio is only 1.1. Out offense creates a lot of assists as well. Ball movement is pretty and works well at times, but when assists attempts are a high TO risk, the returns diminish quickly.
|
|
|
|
Post by lotrader on Feb 18, 2020 18:18:11 GMT -8
Finishing close games is at least 50% belief & confidence (if not more). And we can't rely on just Pivec and Slocum at the end of a game, we need contributions from others. This is where we miss Taya being able to bury a 3-pointer, or, taking her tall defender out of the paint creating room for a guard to drive down the middle. We don't have that with Maddie. No need for the defense to guard Maddie beyond a 5 ft circle. I would like to see Trish get minutes at the end of the game, giving the defense a look they haven't seen; i.e., not be so predictable.
I am impressed that we have literally been in every game, minus the Duck game down in Eugene. Let's hope Rueck comes up with a new wrinkle that works. I'm liking what Jas brings, and, she is getting more confident every minute she plays. Hopefully Rueck keeps giving her minutes.
|
|
|
|
Post by beaverwbb fan on Feb 18, 2020 19:30:43 GMT -8
Jas was making identical drives in the first and second half, but in the second half, instead of stopping in the middle of the paint, she realized why not just take it to the hoop? Her three point shot is much improved this season, and if she can make similar strides next season, she will be a reliable Pac-12 player.
|
|
