KML opinion piece

[RadyLady]

I would have never imagined that my first "mod edit" would be in a thread of this nature. I would have guessed it would have been in a thread about UNC... or something along those lines.

Sadly, I feel as if I didnt get my money's worth.

Take heart my friend I don't think it was anything we said, I think it was something we quoted from another poster

 

[meyers7]

KML did appear to be a step slow last Monday, but not just in speed but her thinking. There's always the possibility it was not related to conditioning. Personally, I feel slow and sluggish at least one day a month. Comments.gentlemen?

Not with a ten foot pole. I've been around the block a couple of times. I know a set up when I see it.

 

[PalPa]

If KML is indeed in the best shape of her life, and stronger than ever, she needs to utilize that strength and take her defender down to the low post once in a while, instead of camping out by the 3 point line. After a while, when the defender knows that 3 point shots are all that she is looking for, they will overplay that.

Sounds like a coaching issue.

 

[PalPa]

We can speculate on the reason why KML played so poorly against Stanford but whatever the reason there is no doubt that she was slow and appeared quite a bit heavier than she was at the start of the season last year. Stanford exploited that. Don't take my word for it - remove the NFB glasses and watch the game.

As for DiMauro - I'm probably his only fan here. The reason - he's not afraid to say what he thinks. Sometimes I agree with him and sometimes I don't.

My favorite quote - "Auriemma acts as such because that's what he believes. What he was taught. And because of what he hates the most about women's sports: how everything has to be, in his words, "lovey dovey all the time." Sounds like Auriemma would be vilified were he to post on the BY.

For an athlete conditioning becomes relevant when it affects their performance. If that was the case in the Stanford game then KML owes it to her team to get in the best shape possible.

Does she appear heavier than she was at end of last season? We all know she wasn't in the best condition and was heavier than earlier in the year because of missing 12 games due to illness and injury. Yet the out of condition and overweight KML was the MOP of the Bridgeport regional. She was also a force against Stanford and ND in the final four. So if you look at history maybe the problem is she needs to gain weight.

 

[Rb335]

Everyone loved her after the UC Davis game. Now she is useless after the Stanford game. Ever consider maybe she was coming down with the flu and didn't feel 'right'? I guess time will tell.

I was actually quite unhappy by her performance against UC Davis. She was given wide open set shots. Yes she went 10-13 from 3 and knocked in 30 points. But I said game one she looked really reliant and in love with the outside shot. Her game hasn't expanded since she was a sophomore, and I would argue that it has almost regressed since then. Watch film of her against Baylor as a sophomore and compare it to how she played last season and so far in two games this season. Different player. Its one thing to knock down wide open shots against an easier opponent. Stanford is what shed light on her current situation. I think its apparent that she has lost a step, whether that has to do with weight or not. All of us experience shifting body weight or we lose the ability to do such things as we get older. It's time for her to adjust, consider her flaws, and move forward. She is an extreme talent and I can't imagine her having too many more games like Stanford this season.

 

[Deadrody]

The whole KML controversy, because of one game where she wasn't at the top of her game,
reminds me of the reaction to the Patriots when they lost to Kansas City in week 4 and were vilified by the press and certain fans. Since then they have won every game and have gone from also rans to the best in the NFL. KML will , without question, be there when the NC is on the line.

Jimmy G should be starting, nuff said

 

[Deadrody]

Ok, people, here's a couple tips:

1) KML is not a guard, she's a forward. Who replaced her in the lineup ? Tuck. Is she a guard ? No.

2) I watched the Stanford game, and of all the problems noted, KML getting beat off the dribble by guards was not one that I noted

3) Beyond the fact that KML is not a guard, when none of the actual guards on the team seemed capable of slowing down Stanford's guards, why would you think a forward would be ?

Please stop the amateur analysis of her body / conditioning / body type / etc. Its ridiculous.

 

[phil sampieri]

I was actually quite unhappy by her performance against UC Davis. She was given wide open set shots. Yes she went 10-13 from 3 and knocked in 30 points. But I said game one she looked really reliant and in love with the outside shot. Her game hasn't expanded since she was a sophomore, and I would argue that it has almost regressed since then. Watch film of her against Baylor as a sophomore and compare it to how she played last season and so far in two games this season. Different player. Its one thing to knock down wide open shots against an easier opponent. Stanford is what shed light on her current situation. I think its apparent that she has lost a step, whether that has to do with weight or not. All of us experience shifting body weight or we lose the ability to do such things as we get older. It's time for her to adjust, consider her flaws, and move forward. She is an extreme talent and I can't imagine her having too many more games like Stanford this season.

 

[phil sampieri]

She fell in love with the 3 point shot ? 10 for 13 ? she should have drove to the basket instead.Her game hasn't expanded ? she's regresswed ? MVP last year playoffs, great in semis and finals, and she regressed ? I really hope you are trying tostir the pot by continuing this rediculous assault on the best 3 point shooter in America. Do you realize , because of the threat of her shooting the 3 she helps open the lanes for cutters. By the way she shoots better mthan 40 % now and once shot 50% for a whole season. Try thinking before you post.

 

[rvwsleep]

I've read your post twice and I'm still not sure what you think about KML's game.
The negative:
"Her game hasn't expanded since she was a sophomore"
"I would argue that it has almost regressed since then."
"I think its apparent that she has lost a step"
The positive: "She is an extreme talent and I can't imagine her having too many more games like Stanford this season.
I'm having trouble reconciling her "regression" and "lost step" with "extreme talent" and "not imagining her having too many more games like Stanford this season." If in fact she has lost a step and her game is regressing than wouldn't you expect more subpar games like the one against Stanford ?

 

[Zorro]

1) Did y'all happen to see the NC tourney last year, when Super-K had still not completely recovered from the de-training effects of her bout with mono? If so, did you happen to notice, not just her scoring, but her inside game, rebounding and setting picks? And the minutes she played? If you did, how would you have the cojones to question her dedication to the program, to her team-mates and to winning?
2) She spent the summer training, under staff supervision. She probably could have found much more short-run enjoyable ways to spend the summer, but she didn't; she spent it working on her conditioning. For anyone to have the presumption to say that she did not work hard enough is outrageous.
3) She is not, strictly speaking, a guard. MoJet, Saniya and Kia are guards. Kaleena is not as quick as they are. So what? Very few wings are. She plays canny defense within the GA system AND any defensive deficiencies that she MAY have, as a wing, are much more than made up for by her more-than-excellent offense.
4) 1-3 are facts. This is an opinion. That opinion is that those folks who ....actually, never mind. I will follow the excellent example of LadyR and self-censor.

 

[Phillyconn]

Stanford exposed KML's physical inability to play effective man-to-man D when facing guards who have a good handle, and can drive hard and finish at the basket. The Stanford guards blew by her time, after time, after time. No one can deny that.

The Stanford guards also blew by Jefferson, Chung and Nurse. So why the hue and cry about KML? Because Jefferson, Chung and Nurse are physically capable of correcting their D against those type of guards. KML, in the shape that she's right now, isn't physically capable. Period.

To everyone who said that it was a one-game aberration, because "look how great KML was against UC-Davis"..Really?

Yes, against teams who don't have guards like Stanford, KML won't be a liability defensively on the court. She won't be an issue against 80% of the teams on the schedule. Otherwise, to keep KML on the court against Stanford type teams, UConn will either have to play zone or sit her.

Offensively, it's up to the coaching staff and KML to figure out a way for her to be effective against a D like Stanford threw at her. They'll figure that out, I don't see that being a problem.

But for anyone to say that her body/weight issues don't cause a problem for UConn defensively, when facing a Stanford type team, is just being in denial. Geno wants starters who can guard and play defensively. KML has never looked bigger, or slower, and that's going to be an issue going forward for her and UConn.

It was one game. Other players beside KML looked bad on defense. Let's give the girl a chance before you go crucifying her. I believe that after a few games this issue will be laid to rest.

 

[Phillyconn]

1) Did y'all happen to see the NC tourney last year, when Super-K had still not completely recovered from the de-training effects of her bout with mono? If so, did you happen to notice, not just her scoring, but her inside game, rebounding and setting picks? And the minutes she played? If you did, how would you have the cojones to question her dedication to the program, to her team-mates and to winning?
2) She spent the summer training, under staff supervision. She probably could have found much more short-run enjoyable ways to spend the summer, but she didn't; she spent it working on her conditioning. For anyone to have the presumption to say that she did not work hard enough is outrageous.
3) She is not, strictly speaking, a guard. MoJet, Saniya and Kia are guards. Kaleena is not as quick as they are. So what? Very few wings are. She plays canny defense within the GA system AND any defensive deficiencies that she MAY have, as a wing, are much more than made up for by her more-than-excellent offense.
4) 1-3 are facts. This is an opinion. That opinion is that those folks who ....actually, never mind. I will follow the excellent example of LadyR and self-censor.

Beautiful....Amen

Ok, people, here's a couple tips:

1) KML is not a guard, she's a forward. Who replaced her in the lineup ? Tuck. Is she a guard ? No.

2) I watched the Stanford game, and of all the problems noted, KML getting beat off the dribble by guards was not one that I noted

3) Beyond the fact that KML is not a guard, when none of the actual guards on the team seemed capable of slowing down Stanford's guards, why would you think a forward would be ?

Please stop the amateur analysis of her body / conditioning / body type / etc. Its ridiculous.

Damn right!

 

[Zorro]

Stanford exposed KML's physical inability to play effective man-to-man D when facing guards who have a good handle, and can drive hard and finish at the basket. The Stanford guards blew by her time, after time, after time. No one can deny that. As you point out below, the "blow-by" was a team phenomenon.

The Stanford guards also blew by Jefferson, Chung and Nurse. So why the hue and cry about KML? Because Jefferson, Chung and Nurse are physically capable of correcting their D against those type of guards. KML, in the shape that she's right now, isn't physically capable. Period. Pardon me, but just how do you happen do know what kind of shape she is in?

To everyone who said that it was a one-game aberration, because "look how great KML was against UC-Davis"..Really? Yeah, really. She was.

Yes, against teams who don't have guards like Stanford, KML won't be a liability defensively on the court. She won't be an issue against 80% of the teams on the schedule. Otherwise, to keep KML on the court against Stanford type teams, UConn will either have to play zone or sit her. Pardon me again. You may not be abysmally ignorant, but this statement is.

Offensively, it's up to the coaching staff and KML to figure out a way for her to be effective against a D like Stanford threw at her. They'll figure that out, I don't see that being a problem. Thank heaven for that!

But for anyone to say that her body/weight issues don't cause a problem for UConn defensively, when facing a Stanford type team, is just being in denial. Geno wants starters who can guard and play defensively. KML has never looked bigger, or slower, and that's going to be an issue going forward for her and UConn. See my post below. Kaleena is a much better player than you are a critic. She is the second-best player in wcbb and we, as most of us realize, are damned lucky to have her. Her only sitting will be for short times to get her breath or in blow-outs.

 

[wallman]

The funny part of this conversation which seems to have been ignored is that KML demanded the respect of Stanford and that Samuelson did a great job. You only get that kind of respect if you deserve it. Every Uconn player was beat off the dribble, it was the team defense and rotations that were lacking.

 

[Zorro]

Kml is a good player..no a great player, but she could be even better than great if she were to run faster or jump just a tad higher or defender quick players easier. If anyone believes that her weight doesnt affect her in any way need to take their rose tinted glasses off. This isnt a discussion about wether kml is a good or bad person its simply about basketball ability. Here let me try to give you an example. If a player weighed 600 pounds wouldn't that make them slower or not be able to runas long? An extreme example for sure but sometimes extreme examples are needed to make people understand. The more you weigh the worse you're going to play so at 500 pounds overweight it would be completely obvious how much worse she would play than someone at ideal weight. Now kml isnt 500 lbs overweight [mod edit] . How much does it effect her that she isnt at ideal weight? maybe she can run the floor a 10th of a second faster maybe she can jump one inch higher maybe she can defend quicker guards just little bit better. Someone to say that her weight has zero effect on her stats and defending ability are blatantly lying to themselves. I'll say it again KML Great player, but could she have been one of the best ever or at least better than she is now? Hell yea

And just how do you know that she is not at HER ideal weight? Are you, perhaps, a professional trainer? (The people she has been working with are.) Jes wondrin.

 

[RockyMTblue2]

No, this is actually a topic that has been discussed from time to time. Threads do get locked when the tone turns leering or otherwise inappropriate.

Thank you Nan and JS for your responses to those suggesting this topic is verboten on the Boneyard. I am surprised by the identity of a couple of those making that assertion, since they have a high basketball acumen and have been here with me through several site host iterations of the Boneyard.

At our best we can be super fans while still being capable of analytical, and that includes critical, thinking. Respect for our players should always be paramount, of course. However, if we cannot critically comment on perceived flaws in performance we rob the Boneyard of a key component in its value to hard core sports fans.

I have had a number of conversations with several Boneyarders of great longevity who have expressed growing disquiet about what they perceive as an intolerance to opinions which are less than PC on the Boneyard. I think the rules of the Boneyard encourage vigorous, factually supported discussion and have encouraged people to "hang in there." You just did the same.

 

[Beemer]

From what I have read here, KML spent the summer working on conditioning & nutrition with the UConn staff. I haven't seen anything to suggest that KML has not been or was not diligent about following whatever plan they came up with for her. If that was the case then criticism would definitely be warranted and I'd be all over her like gravy on a slice of turkey.

And while I'm not normally a betting person I would bet that a good part of the reason she didn't play well against Stanford was because she was already fighting the flu. Not that you'll ever hear KML use that as an excuse for her poor play.

Now, if she still struggles once she is back in the line up then I think further discussion about her conditioning, weight, etc. wouldn't be out of line at all. All this fuss over one game though is just too much IMHO.

 

[watanabe]

Most of yous guys are missing the point. All humans have weaknesses. It's the point of having a team effort. If KML's weknesses are showing, then dang it, the other team members are NOT doing their jobs. This discussion should be about why the individual player's weaknesses were so exposed and what their teammates did/did not do, to expose them. When this team is rocking, the weaknesses are covered witht the other players strengths.
This was our failure at Stanford. It was NOT a team effort. It was a bunch of individuals showing their weaknesses. Total fodder for Geno to work with. It was an excellent loss for the rest of the season.

 

[intlzncster]

Thank you Nan and JS for your responses to those suggesting this topic is verboten on the Boneyard. I am surprised by the identity of a couple of those making that assertion, since they have a high basketball acumen and have been here with me through several site host iterations of the Boneyard.

At our best we can be super fans while still being capable of analytical, and that includes critical, thinking. Respect for our players should always be paramount, of course. However, if we cannot critically comment on perceived flaws in performance we rob the Boneyard of a key component in its value to hard core sports fans.

I have had a number of conversations with several Boneyarders of great longevity who have expressed growing disquiet about what they perceive as an intolerance to opinions which are less than PC on the Boneyard. I think the rules of the Boneyard encourage vigorous, factually supported discussion and have encouraged people to "hang in there." You just did the same.

And realistically, if Women's sports ever want to be taken seriously by general sports fans, you have to be able to discuss the players as athletes first (and everything that entails). Protective mother/father syndrome just sets them (and women) back imo.

 

[UConnChapette]

Thank you Nan and JS for your responses to those suggesting this topic is verboten on the Boneyard. I am surprised by the identity of a couple of those making that assertion, since they have a high basketball acumen and have been here with me through several site host iterations of the Boneyard.

At our best we can be super fans while still being capable of analytical, and that includes critical, thinking. Respect for our players should always be paramount, of course. However, if we cannot critically comment on perceived flaws in performance we rob the Boneyard of a key component in its value to hard core sports fans.

I have had a number of conversations with several Boneyarders of great longevity who have expressed growing disquiet about what they perceive as an intolerance to opinions which are less than PC on the Boneyard. I think the rules of the Boneyard encourage vigorous, factually supported discussion and have encouraged people to "hang in there." You just did the same.

The key phrase here is "factually supported". Not sure who has the facts to prove Kaleena is "out of shape" or is carrying more than her ideal body weight or her BMI is too high. If you or anyone else has such proof, feel free to present it then we will have FACTS to support the discussion.. I dare say that young woman is carrying more muscle and is far better conditioned than 95% of the posters here.

And "flaws in performance"? A missed read on defense? A pass out of bounds? A missed wide open layup? A blown inbounds play? Poor shot selection. All a flaw in performance. When it starts getting to a players perceived body weight or other image issues, to me that goes too far.

The only fact we know is that shortly after the Stanford game it was revealed she had flu like symptoms. And then she did not play in the game SIX DAYS LATER because of the flu. When was the last time any one here had the flu? Not a cold...the flu? I remember three years ago. I was feeling weak, tired and listless for a few days before that flu truck ran me over. Once that happened I could barely move....my TOES hurt.

Women have a hard time dealing with body image issues. We are constantly flooded by social media and advertising extolling beauty and thinness. I don't think Kaleena is worried about what any of us anonymous posters think of her body type. My concern is more with the constant message that gets sent that compounds the media message that you have to look a certain way to be acceptable in the eyes of others and if you aren't, it is fair game to be critical no matter who that person is.

Honestly, I don't see all that much difference here with comments about Kaleena's perceived weight issue from the comments about Brittany Griner's deep voice and unfeminine ways that lead to some nasty and unpleasant comments about her. I am offended by both.

I used to love to spend time here. Not so much anymore. I am beginning to feel like this community is one I am not so proud to be a part of. In many ways it is becoming more like the Summitt. I don't mean it in the way you may think I mean it but I will leave it at that.

 

[Ellie]

Hope KML doesn't read The Boneyard. Good, Bad or Neutral this entire thread made me cringe. Just a kid ... I'm thinking.

 

[RadyLady]

Hope KML doesn't read The Boneyard. Good, Bad or Neutral this entire thread made me cringe. Just a kid ... I'm thinking.

yeah, uh, I know that the families read it.

 

[Icebear]

My concern with the flu like symptoms was that it was another bout of mono. That would have been consistent with a slowdown and lack of general sharpness extending to the following weekend game.

 

[RockyMTblue2]

The key phrase here is "factually supported". Not sure who has the facts to prove Kaleena is "out of shape" or is carrying more than her ideal body weight or her BMI is too high. If you or anyone else has such proof, feel free to present it then we will have FACTS to support the discussion.. I dare say that young woman is carrying more muscle and is far better conditioned than 95% of the posters here.

And "flaws in performance"? A missed read on defense? A pass out of bounds? A missed wide open layup? A blown inbounds play? Poor shot selection. All a flaw in performance. When it starts getting to a players perceived body weight or other image issues, to me that goes too far.

The only fact we know is that shortly after the Stanford game it was revealed she had flu like symptoms. And then she did not play in the game SIX DAYS LATER because of the flu. When was the last time any one here had the flu? Not a cold...the flu? I remember three years ago. I was feeling weak, tired and listless for a few days before that flu truck ran me over. Once that happened I could barely move....my TOES hurt.

Women have a hard time dealing with body image issues. We are constantly flooded by social media and advertising extolling beauty and thinness. I don't think Kaleena is worried about what any of us anonymous posters think of her body type. My concern is more with the constant message that gets sent that compounds the media message that you have to look a certain way to be acceptable in the eyes of others and if you aren't, it is fair game to be critical no matter who that person is.

Honestly, I don't see all that much difference here with comments about Kaleena's perceived weight issue from the comments about Brittany Griner's deep voice and unfeminine ways that lead to some nasty and unpleasant comments about her. I am offended by both.

I used to love to spend time here. Not so much anymore. I am beginning to feel like this community is one I am not so proud to be a part of. In many ways it is becoming more like the Summitt. I don't mean it in the way you may think I mean it but I will leave it at that.

Your reference to the Summitt I suppose underscores your feelings, however factually unsupported. If you have eyes to see, you know Kaleena has gained weight. Whether it is muscle, something else which cannot be mentioned, or a combination of both, when you put that together with Geno saying she has lost a step, it becomes a performance issue. She would not be the first athlete who overtrained and lost quickness if that is what is going on. Of course detractors will detract and those who prefer their view rosey will counter-attack. But we have prided ourselves here at the Boneyard at being able to have contrary opinions without getting snarkey with each other.

I am frankly surprised to see us at odds on this. Equating this discussion with homophobic smears about BG is startling to me.