|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Feb 12, 2017 13:49:23 GMT -8
Luckily we're playing D, rebounding, and they are shooting 30%.
The ball handling and decision making is horrendously bad so far. Wasted numerous opportunities to stretch the lead to double digits.
|
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Feb 12, 2017 14:22:40 GMT -8
Lol... so without their "leader"/PG we give up 15 pts in under 5 min!?
And, can't figure out why Gulich not a focus of the offense... their bigs basically gamble and have had to play very little D or risk foul trouble.
6 1/2 quarters of very lackluster basketball this weekend.
Really need to end on a positive these last 15 min.
|
|
gnawitall
Sophomore
Posts: 2,381 
Member is Online
|
Post by gnawitall on Feb 12, 2017 14:30:40 GMT -8
Lol... so without their "leader"/PG we give up 15 pts in under 5 min!? And, can't figure out why Gulich not a focus of the offense... their bigs basically gamble and have had to play very little D or risk foul trouble. 6 1/2 quarters of very lackluster basketball this weekend. Really need to end on a positive these last 15 min. I really think great teams can adjust to the style they need to take advantage of a situation. That's what did the Falcons in. |
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Feb 12, 2017 14:34:10 GMT -8
Better D last half the 3rd... Billings will be the focus and we need to NOT dropp off the 3pt shooters. Stay in front let her do the gyrations and then rebound her misses.
AND NO MORE EFFING TOS!
PS- our best runs have come with Syd sitting and she promptly turns it again at the start of the 4th. She's less than her usual self... emotionally and definitely in her play... sick?
|
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Feb 12, 2017 14:50:39 GMT -8
Now that's a 4th quarter... giving uo 7 pts in last 9 min
|
|
thomasg86
Freshman
FTd
Posts: 376
Grad Year: 2009
|
Post by thomasg86 on Feb 12, 2017 14:51:41 GMT -8
Was unable to watch this one. Been following the score and looks like a solid win. Just checked and saw they had 20 TOs. Yikes!
Good rebound win though. Needed this one!
|
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Feb 12, 2017 15:00:39 GMT -8
Was unable to watch this one. Been following the score and looks like a solid win. Just checked and saw they had 20 TOs. Yikes! Good rebound win though. Needed this one! After giving up a 19 pt 3rd... most of those early, a late 7-0 (?) run got us the 49-46 qtr lead and impetus for the strong 4th. Although Jordan Canada was hurt just before half and never returned our 21 (?) and counting turnovers kept this closer than it should be. |
|
|
|
Post by beavs6 on Feb 12, 2017 16:49:29 GMT -8
is this really a game "turnover" thread? SMH.
Team tied for first in the top ranked league in the country. Lots of positives. Lets pick something to accentuate a negative. Maybe you are corect 1111. I'm reading it and i dont't understand it.
|
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Feb 12, 2017 17:02:37 GMT -8
is this really a game "turnover" thread? SMH. Team tied for first in the top ranked league in the country. Lots of positives. Lets pick something to accentuate a negative. Maybe you are corect 1111. I'm reading it and i dont't understand it. Sarcasm... there are "good/great wins"... "good/great games"... this was not the latter. TOs have been the key issue all year. It's kept this team from achieving more, and will in the post season, regardless of records. The goal is to be peaking at the right time... to make those "records" mean something in the post season. Averaging 19+ tos/game, @ home, over the weekend is not a minute detail. So, if you're in here simply to nit pick over the title of a game thread, be my guest. Otherwise just post. |
|
|
|
Post by jefframp on Feb 12, 2017 17:11:13 GMT -8
It was her haircut on Friday night. |
|
|
|
Post by beavs6 on Feb 12, 2017 17:38:49 GMT -8
is this really a game "turnover" thread? SMH. Team tied for first in the top ranked league in the country. Lots of positives. Lets pick something to accentuate a negative. Maybe you are corect 1111. I'm reading it and i dont't understand it. Sarcasm... there are "good/great wins"... "good/great games"... this was not the latter. TOs have been the key issue all year. It's kept this team from achieving more, and will in the post season, regardless of records. The goal is to be peaking at the right time... to make those "records" mean something in the post season. Averaging 19+ tos/game, @ home, over the weekend is not a minute detail. So, if you're in here simply to nit pick over the title of a game thread, be my guest. Otherwise just post. By all measures, this team has over acheived outside expectations. Are they perfect...nope. In my opinion, to start a negative connentation post before the game starts seems to be picking your own nit. Team is tied for first in the top rated RPI league in the country. Losing what they lost from last year seems pretty good to me. Kids that have been in a funk for a few games seem to maybe have got back on track. All I did was post an opinion different than yours. I even mentioned I cannot understand the thought behind accentuating the negative before the game even starts. UCLA is good. Many on here...you included...even had concerns that they are the type of team that does give this OSU team fits. Yet here we are with those Lady Beavs celebrating a win. Sounds good to me. (Seems like I may have hit a nerve) |
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Feb 12, 2017 18:07:13 GMT -8
Seems that critiques of a poorly played game (to me 20+ to's qualifies) must be reserved for losses or you're not happy with a win! Lol
Oh... wow, I think it's been brought up numerous times... all season long!
I pretty sure I'm one of the few here who has stated I believe this team has overachieved. But, now that they are at this stage pointing out (a quite obvious issue... especially when most are unforced) TOs having not improved and will be their undoing in a "one and done" situation, seems fairly mundane. So, I'm not sure who's nerve was struck, but it wasn't mine! 😁
The constant use of rankings and RPI doesn’t win games. The lack of turnovers does. So while some may hang your hat on worthless statistics I don't, as they mean zero once the game starts (just a clue... if they did USC loses!).
As for "handily", I'm not sure what game was watched. Those of us in attendance saw a battle. A game we held on to win by 5 up by 13... at home... when their best player did not play the last 22 min.
UCLA is the last team I'd want to face in the conference tourney (other than you can count on their coach to be a bone head).
|
|
|
|
Post by beavs6 on Feb 12, 2017 19:51:13 GMT -8
Would be nice to wait to critique until after the game is over. Just my thought, that I am entitled to have.
RPI does not win games(no one said it does). It is a by product of the games already played. I used it as a reference for why I think critiquing this team, that does what teams should do to win games, for things that don't ultimately win games is foolish.
"The lack of turnovers does. So while some may hang your hat on worthless statistics I don't, as they mean zero once the game starts (just a clue... if they did USC loses!)."-- The #1 stat in my opinion is points scored, not TO's. Score more points than your competition and you will normally win more games than you lose. Teams with higher turnover #'s, but can offset it with say better rebounding and defense (opp shooting pct #'s as an example) can be quite successful. I would rather have 20 TO's in a game and win than have 5 TO's in a game and lose. Your harping on this teams TO's is like harping on a team with a high LOB statistic in baseball. Is it an important stat, yes. Is it THE most important stat, no...can it be overcome by excelling at other areas of the game...yep.
"As for "handily", I'm not sure what game was watched."-- Not sure where you are coming up with this quote, as I don't see it anywhere in this thread. Make up things to suit your position I guess. I saw a team(OSU) that played hard and overcame some adversity they saw on the floor. I saw some players that have been in a funk start to break out of their slump and contribute to a team win...a team win on a day that their best player did not score as much as she usually does.
Do I WANT to play UCLA again? No, I would prefer not to. Does continuing to harp about TO's for a team that wins make sense? Not in my opinion. Especially before the game is played. When they lose another game (and they probably will) you can be assured of being able to say either--"See, I TOLD YOU they would lose because of TO's" or "Could you imagine how much worse that loss would be if they would have turned the ball over like they usually do" A broken clock is correct twice a day. I think you are harping on 1 aspect of the game that this team has as a deficiency (if you will) that they are able to overcome by being proficient in other aspects of the game.
|
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Feb 12, 2017 21:19:02 GMT -8
Would be nice to wait to critique until after the game is over. Just my thought, that I am entitled to have. RPI does not win games(no one said it does). It is a by product of the games already played. I used it as a reference for why I think critiquing this team, that does what teams should do to win games, for things that don't ultimately win games is foolish. "The lack of turnovers does. So while some may hang your hat on worthless statistics I don't, as they mean zero once the game starts (just a clue... if they did USC loses!)."-- The #1 stat in my opinion is points scored, not TO's. Score more points than your competition and you will normally win more games than you lose. Teams with higher turnover #'s, but can offset it with say better rebounding and defense (opp shooting pct #'s as an example) can be quite successful. I would rather have 20 TO's in a game and win than have 5 TO's in a game and lose. Your harping on this teams TO's is like harping on a team with a high LOB statistic in baseball. Is it an important stat, yes. Is it THE most important stat, no...can it be overcome by excelling at other areas of the game...yep. "As for "handily", I'm not sure what game was watched."-- Not sure where you are coming up with this quote, as I don't see it anywhere in this thread. Make up things to suit your position I guess. I saw a team(OSU) that played hard and overcame some adversity they saw on the floor. I saw some players that have been in a funk start to break out of their slump and contribute to a team win...a team win on a day that their best player did not score as much as she usually does. Do I WANT to play UCLA again? No, I would prefer not to. Does continuing to harp about TO's for a team that wins make sense? Not in my opinion. Especially before the game is played. When they lose another game (and they probably will) you can be assured of being able to say either--"See, I TOLD YOU they would lose because of TO's" or "Could you imagine how much worse that loss would be if they would have turned the ball over like they usually do" A broken clock is correct twice a day. I think you are harping on 1 aspect of the game that this team has as a deficiency (if you will) that they are able to overcome by being proficient in other aspects of the game. Oh my... where to begin. Well, it's apparent we need to keep it basic, so I'll try. As for "making things up" (do you see that? Lol) Your inane circular arguments are pedestrian and truly are that of a person who needs to be right. You simply create an argument that has zero factual basis on what I (or other posters you choose to srgue with) stated. You just focus on a portion a turn it to some "point" that was never mentioned... like me stating turnoversare more important than points?! What? Lmao So... as with the majority of your posts you simply argue to argue. You sound like a politician who no matter what the question turns the reply into whatever their current agenda may be, facts be damn. Hence... really there is no argument. Lets try to put it into elementary school form for you: -turnovers cost teams a possession... having the ball is how you score points... if you turn it over you lose a possession the opponent gains one. Hence, they have more chances to score points... that's bad 😊 -we turn the ball over way too much... meaning opponents get more possessions than they should... like tonight UCLA had 16 or so more shot attempts... or SC's 28-9 pts off turnovers advantage (that's 19 by the way... we lost by 20)... that's not good 😆 -turnovers have been an issue W or L most of the season 😉 -turnovers are not improving 😲 -turnovers were part of the reason we lost to a 3-9 SC team at home... see above 🙄 -negative trends, such as turnovers, are reason for concern for future games when they seem to be increasing... especially as unforced turnovers are 😞 -win or lose (that's where points come in) you study trends and come up with practice plans to address them. While other teams study them to attack them 😩 -if you've ever coached you'd know the absolute time to harp in the negatives and reinforce fundamentals is after a win. I'm not the coach, but as a fan can post what I see as concerns going forward (not to mention your reply to this post!). But... I'll bet you Coach Rueck and staff mention turnovers and not how many points they scored! Lol Ok... your lesson on interpretation of posts on this site and the importance of turnovers is now complete. Feel free to copy and paste versus taking notes, I'll waive copyright infringement. 😪 |
|
gnawitall
Sophomore
Posts: 2,381
Member is Online
|
Post by gnawitall on Feb 12, 2017 21:48:19 GMT -8
For comic relief, the girls just committed another turnover.
|
|
