|
|
Post by beavershoopsfan on Oct 25, 2017 12:56:58 GMT -8
I really believe that Katie McWilliams is poised for a breakout year as a regular starter during '17-'18. Opposing teams will have to adjust to her as well. At 6'2", she has a unique skill set that you don't see in many female collegiate players. My primary concern with being a fan of hers over the years is that she defers to others too much on the offensive end. I can understand the desire by an unselfish player to defer when you have three WNBA players in the line-up and during practices during your first two years in Corvallis.
Assuming that she stays healthy, the progression and continued development of McWilliams as an offensive threat will be a key determinant of how successful the Beavs will be during '17-'18. She passes well, handles the ball well for a 6'2" player, shoots well, has a high basketball IQ, works hard on the defensive end, and can jump over opposing guards in the lane.
I look forward to re-reading some of the posts by the naysayers a month from now to see how she has fared in contrast with some predictions in this thread from posters who aren't currently singing her praises.
|
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Oct 25, 2017 13:11:19 GMT -8
I really believe that Katie McWilliams is poised for a breakout year as a regular starter during '17-'18. Opposing teams will have to adjust to her as well. At 6'2", she has a unique skill set that you don't see in many female collegiate players. My primary concerns with being a fan of hers over the years is that she defers to others too much on the offensive end. I can understand the desire by an unselfish player to defer when you have three WNBA players in the line-up and during practices with you during your first two years in Corvallis. Assuming that she stays healthy, the progression and continued development of McWilliams as an offensive threat will be a key determinant of how successful the Beavs will be during '17-'18. She passes well, handles the ball well for a 6'2" player, shoots well, has a high basketball IQ, works hard on the defensive end, and can jump over opposing guards in the lane. I look forward to re-reading some of the posts by the naysayers a month from now to see how she has fared in contrast with some predictions in this thread from posters who aren't currently singing her praises. Practicing daily against Destiny Slocum and her quickness isn't going to hurt. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2017 13:37:46 GMT -8
You would still be left with a mismatch: One too many big on the floor unable to match up to a guard. Even if that could be done, you'd still have the problem of having your primary ball handler on offense (KM) out there where she can be harassed by a quick guard (such as Jordin Canada). KM would be unable to get away and unable to even pass. Two years ago when she had to replace Syd she ran into the same problem. She'll be tied up in knots by a quick guard. Bring another player over to double-team her and it's a guaranteed turnover. Without a true PG I'm afraid this season is going to be really disappointing. Last year Rueck had sense enough to realize that KM needed to be replaced in the starting lineup with Pivec. Hopefully he will realize his mistake with KM this year, too, before the season is too far gone. You appear to think poorly of KM. I do not share this opinion. How do you propose using KM? Traditionally with Rueck the team has had 3 guards on the floor almost all the time. I do not see KM playing the power forward spot. It seems to me that you are proposing that it does not matter which of the 3 guard spots KM plays she will be a liability; especially on defense. The team lost 1 game when KM was the starting point guard when Wiese was injured. Rueck places high priority on defense when allotting playing time. KM was considered about the 4th best defender on the team last year with 2 graduating since then. I do agree that KM is not the quickest guard, but that is not the most important thing. We have proved that time and again with Wiese. Just my 2 cents with sincere questions mixed in. Thanks. Last year, Katie Mac averaged just 4.8 ppg and shot only an average 34% from 3 pt range. She attempted only 14 free throws all year, indicating her lack of aggressiveness. Taylor Kalmer had 17 free throw attempts in less than half of KM's minutes. Kat Tudor had more steals and blocks than KM in 13 minutes per game than KM did in 21 minutes. KM is obviously not a standout player. Her height at 6'2" has not given her any advantage over shorter players. She could plug in at the wing or guard in a pinch, but I really favor her coming off the bench. |
|
|
|
Post by bennyskid on Oct 25, 2017 13:44:15 GMT -8
I may be an idiot, but the only thing I came into this season worried about with regards to KatieMac was whether she was ready to step up in the leadership role. The fact that she was elected to be a captain says quite a bit to me. As to whether or not she's quick enough to handle Jordin Canada, etc., the argument just reminds me of all the whining about Sydney Wiese.
As I recall, *before* Syd was a first-round WNBA draft choice, *before* she was an all-conference guard, she was a gangly sophomore point guard who got all kinds of criticism for being too slow and unable to handle the pressure from quick defenders. To so many people, she was the Achilles Heel of the team. Sure, she was a great shooter, but with all her turnovers there was no way we were ever going to compete against Stanford. I heard that over and over again here in Corvallis.
Of course, the rest of the conference was saying, "C**p! What are we supposed to do against a 6' guard with a fast release, a good drive to the basket, and 40+% accuracy from 3-point range? If we can't steal the ball from her before she gets near the arc, we're s*****d!" Sure, Syd had a few balls stolen from her, but once she could start the half-court offense up, she was impossible for other teams to match up with. It's going to be the same with Katie. Jordin Canada may poke a few balls out, but what is she supposed to do once the offense is in motion? Katie is 6'2", is a 40%+ 3-point shooter, and is (potentially) just as much of a penetration threat as Syd.
And - just like Syd - she's really, really smart.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2017 13:53:41 GMT -8
I may be an idiot, but the only thing I came into this season worried about with regards to KatieMac was whether she was ready to step up in the leadership role. The fact that she was elected to be a captain says quite a bit to me. As to whether or not she's quick enough to handle Jordin Canada, etc., the argument just reminds me of all the whining about Sydney Wiese. As I recall, *before* Syd was a first-round WNBA draft choice, *before* she was an all-conference guard, she was a gangly sophomore point guard who got all kinds of criticism for being too slow and unable to handle the pressure from quick defenders. To so many people, she was the Achilles Heel of the team. Sure, she was a great shooter, but with all her turnovers there was no way we were ever going to compete against Stanford. I heard that over and over again here in Corvallis. Of course, the rest of the conference was saying, "C**p! What are we supposed to do against a 6' guard with a fast release, a good drive to the basket, and 40+% accuracy from 3-point range? If we can't steal the ball from her before she gets near the arc, we're s*****d!" Sure, Syd had a few balls stolen from her, but once she could start the half-court offense up, she was impossible for other teams to match up with. It's going to be the same with Katie. Jordin Canada may poke a few balls out, but what is she supposed to do once the offense is in motion? Katie is 6'2", is a 40%+ 3-point shooter, and is (potentially) just as much of a penetration threat as Syd. And - just like Syd - she's really, really smart. KM shot only 33.8% from 3 pt range last year, not 40%. Pretty average. And comparing her to Syd is a real stretch. Syd was aggressive and had real hutzpah, lacking in KM. I'm not saying that KM has no potential, but she's had 2 years to demonstrate her skills and so far I don't think too many people are impressed. To improve, she'll have to work on being more aggressive and figure out how to avoid the negative consequences of slow feet and weak acceleration. |
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Oct 25, 2017 14:11:59 GMT -8
I really believe that Katie McWilliams is poised for a breakout year as a regular starter during '17-'18. Opposing teams will have to adjust to her as well. At 6'2", she has a unique skill set that you don't see in many female collegiate players. My primary concerns with being a fan of hers over the years is that she defers to others too much on the offensive end. I can understand the desire by an unselfish player to defer when you have three WNBA players in the line-up and during practices with you during your first two years in Corvallis. Assuming that she stays healthy, the progression and continued development of McWilliams as an offensive threat will be a key determinant of how successful the Beavs will be during '17-'18. She passes well, handles the ball well for a 6'2" player, shoots well, has a high basketball IQ, works hard on the defensive end, and can jump over opposing guards in the lane. I look forward to re-reading some of the posts by the naysayers a month from now to see how she has fared in contrast with some predictions in this thread from posters who aren't currently singing her praises. You won't hear a word from them. They'll say how great she's playing and hope no one checks back. Or, have some excuse... since many know more than SR about D1 WBB. |
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Oct 25, 2017 14:14:33 GMT -8
I may be an idiot, but the only thing I came into this season worried about with regards to KatieMac was whether she was ready to step up in the leadership role. The fact that she was elected to be a captain says quite a bit to me. As to whether or not she's quick enough to handle Jordin Canada, etc., the argument just reminds me of all the whining about Sydney Wiese. As I recall, *before* Syd was a first-round WNBA draft choice, *before* she was an all-conference guard, she was a gangly sophomore point guard who got all kinds of criticism for being too slow and unable to handle the pressure from quick defenders. To so many people, she was the Achilles Heel of the team. Sure, she was a great shooter, but with all her turnovers there was no way we were ever going to compete against Stanford. I heard that over and over again here in Corvallis. Of course, the rest of the conference was saying, "C**p! What are we supposed to do against a 6' guard with a fast release, a good drive to the basket, and 40+% accuracy from 3-point range? If we can't steal the ball from her before she gets near the arc, we're s*****d!" Sure, Syd had a few balls stolen from her, but once she could start the half-court offense up, she was impossible for other teams to match up with. It's going to be the same with Katie. Jordin Canada may poke a few balls out, but what is she supposed to do once the offense is in motion? Katie is 6'2", is a 40%+ 3-point shooter, and is (potentially) just as much of a penetration threat as Syd. And - just like Syd - she's really, really smart. KM shot only 33.8% from 3 pt range last year, not 40%. Pretty average. And comparing her to Syd is a real stretch. Syd was aggressive and had real hutzpah, lacking in KM. I'm not saying that KM has no potential, but she's had 2 years to demonstrate her skills and so far I don't think too many people are impressed. To improve, she'll have to work on being more aggressive and figure out how to avoid the negative consequences of slow feet and weak acceleration. "Most"... just when "we" all thought you couldn't state less knowledgeable info! WOW. Did Nick cut your daughter? Wasn't good enough to garner minutes? Funny how your so focused on Katie. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2017 14:22:07 GMT -8
KM shot only 33.8% from 3 pt range last year, not 40%. Pretty average. And comparing her to Syd is a real stretch. Syd was aggressive and had real hutzpah, lacking in KM. I'm not saying that KM has no potential, but she's had 2 years to demonstrate her skills and so far I don't think too many people are impressed. To improve, she'll have to work on being more aggressive and figure out how to avoid the negative consequences of slow feet and weak acceleration. "Most"... just when "we" all thought you couldn't state less nolledgable info! WOW. Did Nick cut your dotter? Wasn't good enuph to garner minutes? Funny how your so focusssed on Katie. O Mighty One! Again you bless me with your thoughts! I am so undeserving, yet you take time from your lofty pursuits to focus on me and rectify my wayward behavior! I am truly blessed. I would implore you to think less of me and grant me less of your time, but perhaps thou knowest best. It is not for me to question you, O Mighty One! And I'm SURE the spelling error that I thought I detected in your missive is a consequence of my fragile brain or a defect in Benny's rendering of your thoughts, so fear not! My opinion of you has not lessened! |
|
|
|
Post by believeinthebeavs on Oct 25, 2017 15:50:29 GMT -8
I think I'm going to sit back and let coach Rueck make the decision of who plays where. He has done a good job of it for the last seven years.
|
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Oct 25, 2017 17:44:38 GMT -8
"Most"... just when "we" all thought you couldn't state less nolledgable info! WOW. Did Nick cut your dotter? Wasn't good enuph to garner minutes? Funny how your so focusssed on Katie. O Mighty One! Again you bless me with your thoughts! I am so undeserving, yet you take time from your lofty pursuits to focus on me and rectify my wayward behavior! I am truly blessed. I would implore you to think less of me and grant me less of your time, but perhaps thou knowest best. It is not for me to question you, O Mighty One! And I'm SURE the spelling error that I thought I detected in your missive is a consequence of my fragile brain or a defect in Benny's rendering of your thoughts, so fear not! My opinion of you has not lessened! Lol... glad you keep the level of posts consistent... trouble even quoting... "humor" that rivals Shelby's. You two should hang out. |
|
|
|
Post by blackbug on Oct 25, 2017 22:12:33 GMT -8
You appear to think poorly of KM. I do not share this opinion. How do you propose using KM? Traditionally with Rueck the team has had 3 guards on the floor almost all the time. I do not see KM playing the power forward spot. It seems to me that you are proposing that it does not matter which of the 3 guard spots KM plays she will be a liability; especially on defense. The team lost 1 game when KM was the starting point guard when Wiese was injured. Rueck places high priority on defense when allotting playing time. KM was considered about the 4th best defender on the team last year with 2 graduating since then. I do agree that KM is not the quickest guard, but that is not the most important thing. We have proved that time and again with Wiese. Just my 2 cents with sincere questions mixed in. Thanks. Last year, Katie Mac averaged just 4.8 ppg and shot only an average 34% from 3 pt range. She attempted only 14 free throws all year, indicating her lack of aggressiveness. Taylor Kalmer had 17 free throw attempts in less than half of KM's minutes. Kat Tudor had more steals and blocks than KM in 13 minutes per game than KM did in 21 minutes. KM is obviously not a standout player. Her height at 6'2" has not given her any advantage over shorter players. She could plug in at the wing or guard in a pinch, but I really favor her coming off the bench. I agree that KM was mired in a season long slump last year. If I remember correctly there was a concussion that contributed to this. She lacked aggressiveness as well quite often, which also contributed to the slump. Her freshman season she shot closer to 36% from 3. I expect KM to improve this season. Comparing KM to Wiese is obviously shortsighted. The only reason for this is to show that you can be successful with a slower and taller point guard. In this situation the ladies will have to continue what they have successfully done in the past: play tough defense and play effective offense capitalizing on opportunities, as the possessions will continue to be less than the other team. We all know that the amount of steals in Rueck's defense the past several years has very little to do with the quality. The defense is about forcing opponents into tough shots or blocking them and then getting the rebound. We have Rueck's own words about Kalmer that she needs to improve on defense for more playing time. He does not say the same thing about KM. When I watch the games I consistently see KM keeping herself between the basket and opponent and making shots difficult. Kalmer does not do this as well. I am a fan of Kalmer and I definitely hope she has a breakout season as well. It looks like Kalmer will be the 4th guard up in a 3 guard lineup. It would be cool to see the experiment of a lineup of KM, Kalmer, Pivec, Tudor and Gulich. This would be a very good shooting lineup and could give the opponents fits. |
|
|
|
Post by ochobeavo on Oct 26, 2017 6:40:59 GMT -8
I think I'm going to sit back and let coach Rueck make the decision of who plays where. He has done a good job of it for the last seven years. Meh. I think jury is out until he proves it to us with a 4th consecutive Pac-12 title. I mean 90-15 over 3 years is okay I guess - if you want to settle for only winning 85% of the time. But get back to me when he's 105-0.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2017 8:31:40 GMT -8
I really believe that Katie McWilliams is poised for a breakout year as a regular starter during '17-'18. Opposing teams will have to adjust to her as well. At 6'2", she has a unique skill set that you don't see in many female collegiate players. My primary concerns with being a fan of hers over the years is that she defers to others too much on the offensive end. I can understand the desire by an unselfish player to defer when you have three WNBA players in the line-up and during practices with you during your first two years in Corvallis. Assuming that she stays healthy, the progression and continued development of McWilliams as an offensive threat will be a key determinant of how successful the Beavs will be during '17-'18. She passes well, handles the ball well for a 6'2" player, shoots well, has a high basketball IQ, works hard on the defensive end, and can jump over opposing guards in the lane. I look forward to re-reading some of the posts by the naysayers a month from now to see how she has fared in contrast with some predictions in this thread from posters who aren't currently singing her praises. You won't hear a word from them. They'll say how great she's playing and hope no one checks back. Or, have some excuse... since many know more than SR about D1 WBB. Heck, no! Us naysayers will be taking CREDIT for her improvement, since it must have been our public doubts about her that spurred her improvement! The real question is: Will we hear you saying "Well Thickhead, of course were right, how could I ever have doubted you?" if she is NOT doing well? But in all seriousness, I hope I am wrong and that she does well as the team's QB. SR is not incapable of error: He played Jen'Von'Ta, who should never have seen the court during a game, so he doesn't have a spotless record of good decisions in spite of his winning percentage. I cringe when I think about that. |
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Oct 26, 2017 9:41:25 GMT -8
You won't hear a word from them. They'll say how great she's playing and hope no one checks back. Or, have some excuse... since many know more than SR about D1 WBB. Heck, no! Us naysayers will be taking CREDIT for her improvement, since it must have been our public doubts about her that spurred her improvement! The real question is: Will we hear you saying "Well Thickhead, of course were right, how could I ever have doubted you?" if she is NOT doing well? But in all seriousness, I hope I am wrong and that she does well as the team's QB. SR is not incapable of error: He played Jen'Von'Ta, who should never have seen the court during a game, so he doesn't have a spotless record of good decisions in spite of his winning percentage. I cringe when I think about that. OSU WBB won it's first outright Pac-10/12 conference championship in '14-15 using a 10 player roster. Playing mostly a 3-guard set with 5 guards (Jamie, Sydney, Gabby, Ali & Jen) you're going to HAVE to give some playing time to your 5th guard. In '15-16 OSU won Pac-12 co-championship & tourney and advanced to Final 4. JVH's minutes decreased with the addition of Katie McW but her averages went up. It's just silly to claim that Jen Hill should "never have seen the court". Such comments mark you as more of provocateur than a thoughtful contributor. "SR is not incapable of error" Sorry, but that's not the standard by which any serious person judges coaching success. (OBTW. Let's compare JVH's '16 stat line to Taylor Kalmer's '17 stat line: Games played, Ave Pts, Assists/TO's, Steals JVH '16 - 15, 5.5, 11/7, 3 TK '17 - 24, 3.3, 21/21, 5) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2017 10:56:57 GMT -8
Heck, no! Us naysayers will be taking CREDIT for her improvement, since it must have been our public doubts about her that spurred her improvement! The real question is: Will we hear you saying "Well Thickhead, of course were right, how could I ever have doubted you?" if she is NOT doing well? But in all seriousness, I hope I am wrong and that she does well as the team's QB. SR is not incapable of error: He played Jen'Von'Ta, who should never have seen the court during a game, so he doesn't have a spotless record of good decisions in spite of his winning percentage. I cringe when I think about that. OSU WBB won it's first outright Pac-10/12 conference championship in '14-15 using a 10 player roster. Playing mostly a 3-guard set with 5 guards (Jamie, Sydney, Gabby, Ali & Jen) you're going to HAVE to give some playing time to your 5th guard. In '15-16 OSU won Pac-12 co-championship & tourney and advanced to Final 4. JVH's minutes decreased with the addition of Katie McW but her averages went up. It's just silly to claim that Jen Hill should "never have seen the court". Such comments mark you as more of provocateur than a thoughtful contributor. "SR is not incapable of error" Sorry, but that's not the standard by which any serious person judges coaching success. (OBTW. Let's compare JVH's '16 stat line to Taylor Kalmer's '17 stat line: Games played, Ave Pts, Assists/TO's, Steals JVH '16 - 15, 5.5, 11/7, 3 TK '17 - 24, 3.3, 21/21, 5) JVH should never have seen the court. Slow and created a lot of turnovers, provided no offense or defense against good teams. I don't see how anyone can honestly dispute that. He played her and left Taylor Kalmer sitting on the bench. As bad as JVH was, there was no excuse for that. You can say TK couldn't play defense, but JVH was so bad that there's no doubt that TK was better. In ALL respects. Playing JVH over TK was an actual, real, substantial mistake. When I say SR is not incapable of error, I'm NOT judging him. I'm judging you and others who take offense at criticism of SR. The simple fact is that many on this board take offense at any criticism of SR, and usually it is on the basis of his good record. Quoting his record is not a worthy argument. He DOES make mistakes, so merely pointing out a mistake of his should not warrant angry rebuke. |
|
