|
|
Post by skyrider on Feb 9, 2023 18:39:30 GMT -8
Mancarl,
I have gone back and watched carefully several games that I recorded. Probably the last 6 games. To me it appears that so many of the OSU players are playing "tight", "anxious", and "mechanical" versus how basketball players need to play to have any chance of being very successful.
There is every chance that I am way off base about this which is why I would your view on the subject. I am not questioning the effort, desire, or determination of the group.
I am questioning the almost agonizing way that several of the players seem to be trying to do every thing in some sort of structured way on offense that takes away the free flowing movement necessary for success. It seems to be happening on both offense and defense. Somehow they all are virtually a step slow in all phases of the game, whether it is offense, shooting, defending, rebounding, even out of bounds plays!
I look forward to getting the "straight dope" from you.
Thanks,
Skyrider
|
|
|
|
Post by beaveragain on Feb 9, 2023 20:49:28 GMT -8
Mancarl,
I have gone back and watched carefully several games that I recorded. Probably the last 6 games. To me it appears that so many of the OSU players are playing "tight", "anxious", and "mechanical" versus how basketball players need to play to have any chance of being very successful.
There is every chance that I am way off base about this which is why I would your view on the subject. I am not questioning the effort, desire, or determination of the group.
I am questioning the almost agonizing way that several of the players seem to be trying to do every thing in some sort of structured way on offense that takes away the free flowing movement necessary for success. It seems to be happening on both offense and defense. Somehow they all are virtually a step slow in all phases of the game, whether it is offense, shooting, defending, rebounding, even out of bounds plays!
I look forward to getting the "straight dope" from you.
Thanks,
Skyrider
Last six games? Would those be the ones where the Beav's only lost to two top ten teams by 2 and 3 points, and beat Oregon? Would those be the games they were so hopeless on offense and defense? Would you go on about how hopeless the men's team was if they lost to two top ten teams by a total of five points and beat another ranked team? Just curious. |
|
|
|
Post by rmancarl on Feb 9, 2023 20:52:13 GMT -8
Oh, Skyrider, lol. I don't know what you will get from me. It's likely not anything useful. What I would say is that I think your observations are quite good. I have no doubt that much of this team's play is mechanical. My reasoning is likely not the same as most on this board. I think many here would contribute that to SR's system, or him controlling plays. I do think that plays a role, but only because of the inexperience of this team.
You have a team with 4 returning players, who are not upperclassmen, and weren't starters together last season. You bring in 7 new players, 5 of them freshman and two transfers. 5 players have never played college ball, much less Power 5, and the other two have never played under SR or any of the other 9 players on this team. They are learning the system, learning how to play with each other, learning the competition, learning how officials call games at the college level, and learning how their game fits with everyone else. I'm going to quote wbosh15 from the 'Game thread Colorado' thread from earlier this week, "Rueck LOVES juniors/seniors that have been in the program and have experience". It's not just Rueck. All coaches love having veterans, and especially if it can be veterans experienced in their program who have learned their system. Statistics bare this out both for teams, and individuals. When I get some time, I'll post some stats from research I did a few weeks back.
Back to your thoughts. Your observation that this team has been a step slow and mechanical are probably correct. I'm not a pro, or an expert, but I am willing to stake my lack of a reputation on the reason being the youth of this team more than any other factor including many of the theories brought up on this board. Winners in this league are largely teams with the most impactful players being upperclassmen (women).
|
|
|
|
Post by skyrider on Feb 10, 2023 6:33:43 GMT -8
Oh, Skyrider, lol. I don't know what you will get from me. It's likely not anything useful. What I would say is that I think your observations are quite good. I have no doubt that much of this team's play is mechanical. My reasoning is likely not the same as most on this board. I think many here would contribute that to SR's system, or him controlling plays. I do think that plays a role, but only because of the inexperience of this team. You have a team with 4 returning players, who are not upperclassmen, and weren't starters together last season. You bring in 7 new players, 5 of them freshman and two transfers. 5 players have never played college ball, much less Power 5, and the other two have never played under SR or any of the other 9 players on this team. They are learning the system, learning how to play with each other, learning the competition, learning how officials call games at the college level, and learning how their game fits with everyone else. I'm going to quote wbosh15 from the 'Game thread Colorado' thread from earlier this week, "Rueck LOVES juniors/seniors that have been in the program and have experience". It's not just Rueck. All coaches love having veterans, and especially if it can be veterans experienced in their program who have learned their system. Statistics bare this out both for teams, and individuals. When I get some time, I'll post some stats from research I did a few weeks back. Back to your thoughts. Your observation that this team has been a step slow and mechanical are probably correct. I'm not a pro, or an expert, but I am willing to stake my lack of a reputation on the reason being the youth of this team more than any other factor including many of the theories brought up on this board. Winners in this league are largely teams with the most impactful players being upperclassmen (women). mancarl,
What is required in this situation then is a great deal of patience and waiting for an eventual good result. Unfortunately with the portal situation and what has happened recently with the Beavs losing so many good players to it, that eventual result may never materialize.
Interesting that now your program can be so affected negatively by this factor.
So now it appears that OSU fans will just have to wait and hope the current players choose to return.
Thanks for your response.
|
|
|
|
Post by beavblvr on Feb 10, 2023 8:44:31 GMT -8
I agree a lot with what rmancarl stated in believing the team playing very mechanical, tight, etc., I’ve had similar thoughts when watching our team versus our opponents or other top 25 teams that I’ve seen play on tv. I agree that a lot of this is associated with so many young, and/or new players in the system; and thus does take time to just get the experience of playing against such fast, elite teams at the pac12 level, as well as playing with your teammates and understanding each ones strengths.
Example, on offense, a play is called and the team tries to run it as practiced, but game speed is just different and we seems to just force passes to the expected teammate or spot in how the play is supposed to be executed. Bendu and TVO seem to be the only ones allowed to adapt, modify and create. I feel all five players need to be able to evaluate and see a potential mismatch, etc, and exploit it. I think AJ is a prime example, as I believe she has the skills to be able to play more free and create on her own, beating her defender and pulling up for a mid-range jumper, or drawing a double team and finding the open player. Again, more time together will help, but it does appear the players are somewhat rigid in execution. AJ has had a few games where it appeared she played more free, so maybe it is more confidence related based on who is guarding them etc, and varies game to game.
IDK, just one example, and more time together, and just flat out making more 3 pointers as a team, will certainly help! But in this day and age of the portal it will be hard to consistently keep a roster in tact in the system to get that experience. Hopefully we can at least keep the core group that is so often discussed on this forum.
Some great chat from folks, agree with a lot of it. Go Beavs!
|
|
|
|
Post by rmancarl on Feb 10, 2023 9:45:02 GMT -8
Oh, Skyrider, lol. I don't know what you will get from me. It's likely not anything useful. What I would say is that I think your observations are quite good. I have no doubt that much of this team's play is mechanical. My reasoning is likely not the same as most on this board. I think many here would contribute that to SR's system, or him controlling plays. I do think that plays a role, but only because of the inexperience of this team. You have a team with 4 returning players, who are not upperclassmen, and weren't starters together last season. You bring in 7 new players, 5 of them freshman and two transfers. 5 players have never played college ball, much less Power 5, and the other two have never played under SR or any of the other 9 players on this team. They are learning the system, learning how to play with each other, learning the competition, learning how officials call games at the college level, and learning how their game fits with everyone else. I'm going to quote wbosh15 from the 'Game thread Colorado' thread from earlier this week, "Rueck LOVES juniors/seniors that have been in the program and have experience". It's not just Rueck. All coaches love having veterans, and especially if it can be veterans experienced in their program who have learned their system. Statistics bare this out both for teams, and individuals. When I get some time, I'll post some stats from research I did a few weeks back. Back to your thoughts. Your observation that this team has been a step slow and mechanical are probably correct. I'm not a pro, or an expert, but I am willing to stake my lack of a reputation on the reason being the youth of this team more than any other factor including many of the theories brought up on this board. Winners in this league are largely teams with the most impactful players being upperclassmen (women). mancarl,
What is required in this situation then is a great deal of patience and waiting for an eventual good result. Unfortunately with the portal situation and what has happened recently with the Beavs losing so many good players to it, that eventual result may never materialize.
Interesting that now your program can be so affected negatively by this factor.
So now it appears that OSU fans will just have to wait and hope the current players choose to return.
Thanks for your response.
All we have at this point is hope. Hope that the core group sticks around, subtractions are limited, and additions are talented. I'll be the first to admit that I will forever be worried about losses to the portal, but right now I have hopes that the majority of the team will return. You certainly have to wonder about Martha, Lily, and Adlee in particular. I feel it would be a mistake for any of them to leave, but I get it, if they think they can play more, and be closer to home. You only go around once in life. Ellie Mack would be a great example of someone who grew as she learned the system and played against Pac12 level talent. She came in with a lot of college experience, but not much time playing against the kind of talent she would meet in the Pac12. Her first year here she averaged 6.8ppg and 3.7rpg. Last season she 9.4ppg and 4.5rpg. You could really see her take hold of her role here the last half of the season. The final nine games she scored double figure points ever game, averaging 13.3ppg during that time frame, and she had a 13pt, 9 rebound game against Stanford during that stretch. That in itself, is pretty impressive. After she found her role, learned the system and got used to the competition, she was a much better contributor than when she came in. Experience is huge, and if the Beavs can hold on to their current youthful core, they will be good. How good will depend on making the right additions as the team grows. |
|
|
|
Post by skyrider on Feb 10, 2023 11:22:34 GMT -8
All we have at this point is hope. Hope that the core group sticks around, subtractions are limited, and additions are talented. I'll be the first to admit that I will forever be worried about losses to the portal, but right now I have hopes that the majority of the team will return. You certainly have to wonder about Martha, Lily, and Adlee in particular. I feel it would be a mistake for any of them to leave, but I get it, if they think they can play more, and be closer to home. You only go around once in life. Ellie Mack would be a great example of someone who grew as she learned the system and played against Pac12 level talent. She came in with a lot of college experience, but not much time playing against the kind of talent she would meet in the Pac12. Her first year here she averaged 6.8ppg and 3.7rpg. Last season she 9.4ppg and 4.5rpg. You could really see her take hold of her role here the last half of the season. The final nine games she scored double figure points ever game, averaging 13.3ppg during that time frame, and she had a 13pt, 9 rebound game against Stanford during that stretch. That in itself, is pretty impressive. After she found her role, learned the system and got used to the competition, she was a much better contributor than when she came in. Experience is huge, and if the Beavs can hold on to their current youthful core, they will be good. How good will depend on making the right additions as the team grows. mancarl,
Nobody ( I guess) redshirts anymore so that avenue to improvement within the school you are at for a player seems to no longer be an option. Am I correct in that assumption?
Then you have the inevitable "grass is greener on the other side of the fence" syndrome which is very powerful. Also you probably have parents, AAU coaches, etc., etc. whispering in the ear of players that they are better than Sue Bird, or Candace Parker, or whoever.
I think as a Coaching staff, you must offer a really strong player development component for your program. Show the players in structure and detail exactly what they need to do in terms of time and effort to maximize their potential. If clearly they are not interested and/or willing to do so then do not play them significant game time.
If they "portal" anyway you have done done all you can as a Coaching staff.
The Ellie Mack example is a great one. Thank you!!
|
|
|
|
Post by lotrader on Feb 10, 2023 12:41:59 GMT -8
If the coaching staff is worried about any of the freshmen/sophomores leaving, then they better give large minutes to those players in every game the remainder of the season. No point in worrying what you cannot control. The good news is coaches do control the minutes on the floor, and minutes on the pine. I'm sure coaches worry more than we do, so I expect to see some minutes being devoted to the young ones starting tonight vs UCLA.
|
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Feb 10, 2023 13:21:37 GMT -8
If the coaching staff is worried about any of the freshmen/sophomores leaving, then they better give large minutes to those players in every game the remainder of the season. No point in worrying what you cannot control. The good news is coaches do control the minutes on the floor, and minutes on the pine. I'm sure coaches worry more than we do, so I expect to see some minutes being devoted to the young ones starting tonight vs UCLA. That is a terrible precedent to set. You play the players that you think give you the best chance to win no matter what. You don't play younger players because you think they will leave (unless they have earned the minutes). Bagging a season may play in professional sports, but it doesn't work in college. Good luck keeping upper classmen in the future, if you stop playing them when things aren't going great just because you don't want to lose the freshmen. |
|
|
|
Post by skyrider on Feb 10, 2023 14:02:19 GMT -8
If the coaching staff is worried about any of the freshmen/sophomores leaving, then they better give large minutes to those players in every game the remainder of the season. No point in worrying what you cannot control. The good news is coaches do control the minutes on the floor, and minutes on the pine. I'm sure coaches worry more than we do, so I expect to see some minutes being devoted to the young ones starting tonight vs UCLA. That is a terrible precedent to set. You play the players that you think give you the best chance to win no matter what. You don't play younger players because you think they will leave (unless they have earned the minutes). Bagging a season may play in professional sports, but it doesn't work in college. Good luck keeping upper classmen in the future, if you stop playing them when things aren't going great just because you don't want to lose the freshmen. Judge Smalls,
Your above post is excellent and I believe very few of us would not agree. However at what point in a losing season do you decide (a) that your team has little or no chance to make the NCAA tournament (or even the NIT) and (b) it will be better in the long run do play younger players for the rest of the year because their gaining experience and evaluating them will be better for the likely success of the team in the future. The post that I sent a few hours ago (see below) I believe explains why this is why I believe the player development aspect is so important. If a player is convinced they are getting better and better they are likely to stay in your program even if it means they may have to wait longer than they would prefer for significant playing time.
Previous Skyrider Post
Nobody ( I guess) redshirts anymore so that avenue to improvement within the school you are at for a player seems to no longer be an option.
Am I correct in that assumption?
Then you have the inevitable "grass is greener on the other side of the fence" syndrome which is very powerful. Also you probably have parents, AAU coaches, etc., etc. whispering in the ear of players that they are better than Sue Bird, or Candace Parker, or whoever.
I think as a Coaching staff, you must offer a really strong player development component for your program. Show the players in structure and detail exactly what they need to do in terms of time and effort to maximize their potential. If clearly they are not interested and/or willing to do so
then do not play them significant game time.
If they "portal" anyway you have done done all you can as a Coaching staff.
The Ellie Mack example is a great one. Thank you!!
|
|
|
|
Post by lotrader on Feb 10, 2023 14:05:42 GMT -8
If the coaching staff is worried about any of the freshmen/sophomores leaving, then they better give large minutes to those players in every game the remainder of the season. No point in worrying what you cannot control. The good news is coaches do control the minutes on the floor, and minutes on the pine. I'm sure coaches worry more than we do, so I expect to see some minutes being devoted to the young ones starting tonight vs UCLA. That is a terrible precedent to set. You play the players that you think give you the best chance to win no matter what. You don't play younger players because you think they will leave (unless they have earned the minutes). Bagging a season may play in professional sports, but it doesn't work in college. Good luck keeping upper classmen in the future, if you stop playing them when things aren't going great just because you don't want to lose the freshmen. Who are the upper classmen we should be concerned about setting a precedent? Mannen (walk-on), Bendu (final year), Aaron, (her minutes have been reduced over the last 3-4 games anyway). And by your statement "You play the players that you think give you the best chance to win no matter what". I think it is obvious with maybe the exception of Bendu, we should be playing the freshmen/sophomores the rest of the season, because they give us the best shot at winning. |
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Feb 10, 2023 14:19:26 GMT -8
That is a terrible precedent to set. You play the players that you think give you the best chance to win no matter what. You don't play younger players because you think they will leave (unless they have earned the minutes). Bagging a season may play in professional sports, but it doesn't work in college. Good luck keeping upper classmen in the future, if you stop playing them when things aren't going great just because you don't want to lose the freshmen. Who are the upper classmen we should be concerned about setting a precedent? Mannen (walk-on), Bendu (final year), Aaron, (her minutes have been reduced over the last 3-4 games anyway). And by your statement "You play the players that you think give you the best chance to win no matter what". I think it is obvious with maybe the exception of Bendu, we should be playing the freshmen/sophomores the rest of the season, because they give us the best shot at winning. I would consider Mit an upper classmen even as a RS-So. Just because she has been here for so long. I'm just saying that there is a fine line between getting experience to your younger players and bagging the season. If you just start playing players because your afraid of losing them, that is not a good culture for the program. This is not the NBA where players are under contract and you can just sit them to get younger players minutes and they can't leave. You still have to try to win as many games as possible, because that is the tone that you are trying to set for the program. |
|
|
|
Post by lotrader on Feb 10, 2023 15:34:50 GMT -8
Who are the upper classmen we should be concerned about setting a precedent? Mannen (walk-on), Bendu (final year), Aaron, (her minutes have been reduced over the last 3-4 games anyway). And by your statement "You play the players that you think give you the best chance to win no matter what". I think it is obvious with maybe the exception of Bendu, we should be playing the freshmen/sophomores the rest of the season, because they give us the best shot at winning. I would consider Mit an upper classmen even as a RS-So. Just because she has been here for so long. I'm just saying that there is a fine line between getting experience to your younger players and bagging the season. If you just start playing players because your afraid of losing them, that is not a good culture for the program. This is not the NBA where players are under contract and you can just sit them to get younger players minutes and they can't leave. You still have to try to win as many games as possible, because that is the tone that you are trying to set for the program. Mit is a sophomore as is TvO. Bagging the season? That goal has already been achieved. Coaches need to develop those who give us the best chance in the PAC-12 Tournament, and beyond. And it isn't with the minutes allocated to the junior/seniors this season. Starting Timea last game was good to see and progress. I'm advocating allocating at least 160 of the 200 minutes available to our freshmen/sophomores--that gives this team the best chance to win |
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Feb 10, 2023 15:39:33 GMT -8
I would consider Mit an upper classmen even as a RS-So. Just because she has been here for so long. I'm just saying that there is a fine line between getting experience to your younger players and bagging the season. If you just start playing players because your afraid of losing them, that is not a good culture for the program. This is not the NBA where players are under contract and you can just sit them to get younger players minutes and they can't leave. You still have to try to win as many games as possible, because that is the tone that you are trying to set for the program. Mit is a sophomore as is TvO. Bagging the season? That goal has already been achieved. Coaches need to develop those who give us the best chance in the PAC-12 Tournament, and beyond. And it isn't with the minutes allocated to the junior/seniors this season. Starting Timea last game was good to see and progress. I'm advocating allocating at least 160 of the 200 minutes available to our freshmen/sophomores--that gives this team the best chance to win I said Mit is a RS-Soph. However, this is her 4th year in the program. She is an essentially an upper classmen. You have no idea if she's going to be here for a full 6 seasons. You can "advocate" all you want. Scott is still going to play who he thinks can help the team win, not who you do. And, he's not going to care what class they are in. |
|
