Ines & Amari

[NY Fan]

Inez is a real basketball player and has shown flashes of becoming a solid contributor if not a star. Amari not so much, but she too has shown hints on both offense , especially directing traffic and passing from the high post. Logic tells me both can provide decent minutes to a short-handed team whose coaches have acknowledged the team is tired. Wouldn't logic dictate that being up by 30 or so points early in 4Q they should be substituted in both to give tired players a rest as well as to provide them more game experience?

Yes, most sincerely Geno is the GOAT, but I do question the above logic. And also yes, I know playing time is earned, but at least in Inez case if not yet Amari, I thought she already had. BTW - Amari was around the #15 recruit - one above Sonia Citron at ND - so it's a mystery why at 6' 5" she hasn't developed faster. But then it's a mystery to me why Lou at nearby Fairfield wasn't noticed sooner.

 

[Argonaut]

CD said a while back that Amari was so out of shape last season that she struggled to finish practices. I think she’s improved over what we saw last year and, hopefully, will continue.

As for Inês, don’t forget she was happily headed to a junior college until UConn called in August. She shows flashes of the player she could be and, if she does that more and more in practice and with the game minutes she does get, she’ll give the coaches a reason to give her more minutes.

As for why they don’t get more minutes even in blowouts, I’d imagine it’s because of how little practice time our desired rotation as had to work together. Better get them the minutes we can get them while they’re cleared to play because you never know what tomorrow will bring.

You can say that the same argument could be made for why Amari and Inês should have more PT, but I think we would rather have the team preparing for best case scenario instead of worst case.

Trust the man with the rings.

 

[hoopsnloops32]

With all the injuries the starters are months behind when they need to be chemistry wise. Playing time together is more available than rest for the most part at this point.

 

[southofnorth]

I like CD’s sub patterns. Plenty of minutes for the bench when you have a sizable lead and shorts bursts as needed to give starters a rest so they can keep playing at the height of their ability. Even phenomenally athletic and well-conditioned athletes like Maya Moore and Gabby Williams needed a breather here and there.

 

[pvdoggy]

But then it's a mystery to me why Lou at nearby Fairfield wasn't noticed sooner.

I don't understand this sentiment, notice sooner than what? Consider Uconn lucky that Lou decided to take an extra year as a grad transfer to refine her game for the next level and that she picked to come to Uconn when asked. What do you expect to have happened before that?

 

[HopJim]

I don't understand this sentiment, notice sooner than what? Consider Uconn lucky that Lou decided to take an extra year as a grad transfer to refine her game for the next level and that she picked to come to Uconn when asked. What do you expect to have happened before that?

I follow Bucknell in the Patriot League and many of their transfers, men and women, have done well in top D1 competition. Why didn't top teams recruit them? Many reasons, including the quality of the HS league they competed in, post HS physical improvements and poor scouting. Who cares? When you see Lou's friends and family, just say "thank you!"

 

[hoophuskee]

Inez is a real basketball player and has shown flashes of becoming a solid contributor if not a star. Amari not so much, but she too has shown hints on both offense , especially directing traffic and passing from the high post. Logic tells me both can provide decent minutes to a short-handed team whose coaches have acknowledged the team is tired. Wouldn't logic dictate that being up by 30 or so points early in 4Q they should be substituted in both to give tired players a rest as well as to provide them more game experience?

Yes, most sincerely Geno is the GOAT, but I do question the above logic. And also yes, I know playing time is earned, but at least in Inez case if not yet Amari, I thought she already had. BTW - Amari was around the #15 recruit - one above Sonia Citron at ND - so it's a mystery why at 6' 5" she hasn't developed faster. But then it's a mystery to me why Lou at nearby Fairfield wasn't noticed sooner.

IMO when you speak of "decent," UCONN is not trying to achieve "decent." They go to Final Fours every year. That’s not "decent;" It's "excellent. In order to maintain "excellent" you need to give your “very good to excellent" players as many minutes as the supreme coach thinks if they are still not performing consistently at the highest level.

Point 2-- This game the coaches didn't say the team was tired any longer. Read UConnCat's post that Cat got from CTInsider and posted on the UCONN-ST John’s postgame thread that specifically is quoting Coach Dailey stating that the team is in good place now. The week before Dailey said they were mentally tired but she isn't saying that any more. Let's believe her. If the Head Coach is playing his players as much as he is and the Asst Coach is saying they are in a good place now; so why do we have to be such "downers" when the most successful coaching duo in wcbb history are telling us in a manner of speak otherwise?

Point 3- Why should Ines get more game experience vs giving more game experience to the better players that are better than "just decent?" If more minutes help the 9th or 10th player, then why wouldn't more minutes help the 6th or 7th player? What's the magic number that is defined for sure that will help UCONN in the NCAA's of the 9th or 10th player that we’re certain they will perform in the one-and-done pressure-cooker NCAA Tourney? Why not play the 6th or 7th player more?

Point 4- IF UCONN's philosophy is wrong then why do they continually go to Final Fours vs other teams that play more of their bench? How tired/ worn out have the 6th or 7th player been that you can point to vs the many, many teams UCONN has beaten that plays a deeper bench?

Point 5- If the philosophy is so wrong then why does UCONN continually recruit so well? Why do so many super recruits want to come to UCONN? Are they that “disgusted” that UCONN “only” gets to Final Fours and recently The Title game in the past few years?

Bottomline is UCONN gets to Finals Fours, Championship games because they don't over-coach. Force the other team to put their "9th or 10th player from their bench" into the game and let's have that type of player switch off on Azzi in a title game. Where would be the advantage be regardless how many minutes Azzi is playing?

 

[Bone Dog]

I like Amari. You can't coach height, as Geno says. That's why teams are willing to take a chance on hs bigs. Amari is a tall 6'5" with very long arms. She knows how to block a shot. She also showed some good instincts on offense (like being able to catch and shoot without bringing the ball down) and a soft touch on her shot. And she can pass from the high post.

There were indications that she wasn't quite ready for D1 play last year. She said she wasn't used to playing against kids her size. CD has said she was out of shape last year and she looked it. She doesn't have quick feet... yet, and on D she sometimes seems timid or even confused. In my experience as a short person, you commit fouls when you don't move your feet quickly enough. I suspect this is true for tall people as well. Eventually, last season and beginning this season, she became more active on high hedges, though she sometimes fouled out there, and wasn't always quick enough getting back into the paint. Once Amari's D becomes more energetic and more precise, she'll be able to contribute even in the close games. It could happen later this season.

 

[LwrcasefaN]

Inez is a real basketball player and has shown flashes of becoming a solid contributor if not a star. Amari not so much, but she too has shown hints on both offense , especially directing traffic and passing from the high post. Logic tells me both can provide decent minutes to a short-handed team whose coaches have acknowledged the team is tired. Wouldn't logic dictate that being up by 30 or so points early in 4Q they should be substituted in both to give tired players a rest as well as to provide them more game experience?

Yes, most sincerely Geno is the GOAT, but I do question the above logic. And also yes, I know playing time is earned, but at least in Inez case if not yet Amari, I thought she already had. BTW - Amari was around the #15 recruit - one above Sonia Citron at ND - so it's a mystery why at 6' 5" she hasn't developed faster. But then it's a mystery to me why Lou at nearby Fairfield wasn't noticed sooner.

With all the injuries, both probably got more minutes in 16 games than they would have without the injuries to other players. The reality is the better the program the deeper the bench can become. Just stay ready...so you don't have to get ready.

 

[Carnac]

I follow Bucknell in the Patriot League and many of their transfers, men and women, have done well in top D1 competition. Why didn't top teams recruit them? Many reasons, including the quality of the HS league they competed in, post HS physical improvements and poor scouting. Who cares? When you see Lou's friends and family, just say "thank you!"

I'll say it now, THANK YOU. Remember this past summer when we all wondered if Lou could adjust her game to play at this "elite" level? Not in our wildest dreams did any of us imagine that not only would Lou adjust, and adjust quicky, but become a starter day 1 and quickly become one of our most trusted and consistent players. She improved her defensive capabilities as well. How many games has Lou carried the team? Where would we be without her? She's a bucket. Is it fair to say that Lou is the best transfer UConn has had..............ever?

 

[Carnac]

With all the injuries, both probably got more minutes in 16 games than they would have without the injuries to other players. The reality is the better the program the deeper the bench can become. Just stay ready...so you don't have to get ready.

I like that.

 

[sun]

There are advantages & disadvantages to everything, pluses & minuses for every decision in life.
Every kid develops at their own unique & individual rate, and every coach has their own individual style and set of priorities.
Geno is in charge of a multi-million WBB program that prioritizes winning national championships.
Not every school has that same philosophy, but every school does what they can to recruit players to win games.
Most kids know what is expected of them when they decide to come to UConn and they can either stay or leave without much penalty, due to the new transfer portal.
They get a scholarship to obtain an education and UConn even pays the players some expense money based on their getting good grades.
Plus they get to travel around the country, eat in restaurants & stay in nice hotels whether they play much or not.
So even if they don't play, they have a lot to be thankful for.
Plus the bench players are not being placed in as much risk of injury when they don't play as much, before they're fully ready.
In that sense Geno is protecting them, the school, the team & himself.
They may not develop as fast but that's Geno's decision.
He has tons of analytics to study how much each player contributes to the outcome of the game, and years of experience.
The same kind of experience that prospects consider when they decide whether to accept a UConn WBB scholarship or not, or attend another school.
It not like the players are suffering much by sitting on the bench.
Maybe there's a silver lining in that they can learn how to better imitate the starters by watching how they win games.
They just need to keep studying, practicing and getting good grades while they wait for their turn to play.
If waiting doesn't bother the bench players then perhaps it shouldn't bother us either.
Look at Mir, she transferred and got to play a lot more and then blows out her knee.
That probably wouldn't have happened if she had stayed at UConn on the bench.
I think that many UConn bench players simply consider themselves to be lucky & just leave it at that.

 

[Skeets]

There are advantages & disadvantages to everything, pluses & minuses for every decision in life.
Every kid develops at their own unique & individual rate, and every coach has their own individual style and set of priorities.
Geno is in charge of a multi-million WBB program that prioritizes winning national championships.
Not every school has that same philosophy, but every school does what they can to recruit players to win games.
Most kids know what is expected of them when they decide to come to UConn and they can either stay or leave without much penalty, due to the new transfer portal.
They get a scholarship to obtain an education and UConn even pays the players some expense money based on their getting good grades.
Plus they get to travel around the country, eat in restaurants & stay in nice hotels whether they play much or not.
So even if they don't play, they have a lot to be thankful for.
Plus the bench players are not being placed in as much risk of injury when they don't play as much, before they're fully ready.
In that sense Geno is protecting them, the school, the team & himself.
They may not develop as fast but that's Geno's decision.
He has tons of analytics to study how much each player contributes to the outcome of the game, and years of experience.
The same kind of experience that prospects consider when they decide whether to accept a UConn WBB scholarship or not, or attend another school.
It not like the players are suffering much by sitting on the bench.
Maybe there's a silver lining in that they can learn how to better imitate the starters by watching how they win games.
They just need to keep studying, practicing and getting good grades while they wait for their turn to play.
If waiting doesn't bother the bench players then perhaps it shouldn't bother us either.
Look at Mir, she transferred and got to play a lot more and then blows out her knee.
That probably wouldn't have happened if she had stayed at UConn on the bench.
I think that many UConn bench players simply consider themselves to be lucky & just leave it at that.

Good post, but I'd like to add that a ship is safer in port, but that's not why it was built.

 

[NY Fan]

IMO when you speak of "decent," UCONN is not trying to achieve "decent." They go to Final Fours every year. That’s not "decent;" It's "excellent. In order to maintain "excellent" you need to give your “very good to excellent" players as many minutes as the supreme coach thinks if they are still not performing consistently at the highest level.

Point 2-- This game the coaches didn't say the team was tired any longer. Read UConnCat's post that Cat got from CTInsider and posted on the UCONN-ST John’s postgame thread that specifically is quoting Coach Dailey stating that the team is in good place now. The week before Dailey said they were mentally tired but she isn't saying that any more. Let's believe her. If the Head Coach is playing his players as much as he is and the Asst Coach is saying they are in a good place now; so why do we have to be such "downers" when the most successful coaching duo in wcbb history are telling us in a manner of speak otherwise?

Point 3- Why should Ines get more game experience vs giving more game experience to the better players that are better than "just decent?" If more minutes help the 9th or 10th player, then why wouldn't more minutes help the 6th or 7th player? What's the magic number that is defined for sure that will help UCONN in the NCAA's of the 9th or 10th player that we’re certain they will perform in the one-and-done pressure-cooker NCAA Tourney? Why not play the 6th or 7th player more?

Point 4- IF UCONN's philosophy is wrong then why do they continually go to Final Fours vs other teams that play more of their bench? How tired/ worn out have the 6th or 7th player been that you can point to vs the many, many teams UCONN has beaten that plays a deeper bench?

Point 5- If the philosophy is so wrong then why does UCONN continually recruit so well? Why do so many super recruits want to come to UCONN? Are they that “disgusted” that UCONN “only” gets to Final Fours and recently The Title game in the past few years?

Bottomline is UCONN gets to Finals Fours, Championship games because they don't over-coach. Force the other team to put their "9th or 10th player from their bench" into the game and let's have that type of player switch off on Azzi in a title game. Where would be the advantage be regardless how many minutes Azzi is playing?

Whoa! Please don't put words in my mouth or attribute things I didn't say. Check your Point 1: My use of "decent" referred to minutes played, not to performance level achieved.

Point 2: Why is raising a legitimate question considered being a downer? Is the Boneyard only a cheering section? One might think the simple act of asking a question rose to a sacrilege.

Point 3: "Why Ines ...Etc.?" Princeton Game!

Point 4 & 5: No-one mentioned anywhere that UConn's philosophy is wrong. My opinion of UConn and its wonderful program is both by paying an outrageous monthly Spectrum subscription to watch them, and by donating to UConn.

BTW - I think GOAT Geno's best coaching performance in the 10 years I've been following the team was last year. They didn't win the championship, faced adversity and injury, yet he got the team to the final. What's not to like?

 

[oldude]

Amari has wonderful skills for a 6’5” post. But as of right now, the game moves a little too fast for her. The way to slow the game down is to get Amari more minutes, and that’s the Catch 22.

If you try to get Amari ready to play in the Big Dance by giving her 15- 20 mpg during the rest of the schedule while, at the same time, trying to fine tune UConn’s core 7 players into a “tournament ready” well-oiled machine, the Huskies might come up short on both fronts.

On the other hand, if Amari becomes a truly viable option off the bench in big games, it really increases UConn’s ability to take on the towering front lines of SC & Stanford in the tournament, should they meet.

It’s a dilemma I have pondered a lot this season, particularly given UConn’s revolving door of injuries. Unlike Geno and his coaching staff, we don’t have the benefit of watching practice every day. We are just going to have to trust that the greatest coach in the history of WBB knows what he’s doing.

 

[LarryLegend]

Seems like recruiting/scouting is a crap shoot at all levels in all sports. Especially in NCAA with the ******** (redacted) portal now. Just look at the UCONN recruiting classes of past several years, how many panned out or even stuck around. If you hit on one a year, you are doing well.
Occasionally there are finds like Bettencourt, she could be a good one.

 

[HopJim]

I like Amari. You can't coach height, as Geno says. That's why teams are willing to take a chance on hs bigs. Amari is a tall 6'5" with very long arms. She knows how to block a shot. She also showed some good instincts on offense (like being able to catch and shoot without bringing the ball down) and a soft touch on her shot. And she can pass from the high post.

There were indications that she wasn't quite ready for D1 play last year. She said she wasn't used to playing against kids her size. CD has said she was out of shape last year and she looked it. She doesn't have quick feet... yet, and on D she sometimes seems timid or even confused. In my experience as a short person, you commit fouls when you don't move your feet quickly enough. I suspect this is true for tall people as well. Eventually, last season and beginning this season, she became more active on high hedges, though she sometimes fouled out there, and wasn't always quick enough getting back into the paint. Once Amari's D becomes more energetic and more precise, she'll be able to contribute even in the close games. It could happen later this season.

When I compare Patterson ver DeBerry for minutes, I look for certain needs. If you need defense, its starting to look like an Amari lean. She has a 4-5+ inch height advantage with her long arms and can stop many shots just by standing in front. Both are foul prone, but Patterson is a foul machine - difficult to put her into close games. Offensive players avoid DeBerry while they often shoot over Patterson or drive into her, forcing fouls. Neither is a great offensive player but DeBerry's height allows her to look over the defense and she lately has been a better passer. Just like I love my children equally, I value Patterson's and DeBerry's contributions but their current skills are becoming more obvious. Predict Amari will begin getting more of the "first big off the bench" minutes.

 

[Bone Dog]

I remember watching a couple of the USA FIBA games from two summers ago. Amari was on the team, and she hardly played. Betts was on it too and she got all the attention. What I mean is that when it comes to hs bigs, after Betts that year was Amari, and yet you'd hardly equate them now. It's not an apples to apples comparison, of course, and even then Betts seemed lumbering, just like Amari did. But Tara has gotten a lot more energy out of Betts in the few games I've seen this year.

The FIBA games last summer also revealed something similar. Del Rosario and Ice were the bigs, and Ice was the class of the tournament. Dominant, full of energy, grabbed all the rebounds, fired passes down the court, etc. Del Rosario was pretty good too, but seemed much lower energy than Ice. She's the highest ranked true big this year. Will she be a project like Amari, or will Dawn be able to get more energy out of her right away, like Tara has done with Betts?

In the end, I'm not sure it matters. Amari will find her energetic self by the end of this season and then give the Huskies two really solid years. My guess is that's what Betts and Rosario will do as well. That's all any team usually gets from hs recruits. The ones who can start right away are exceptions.

 

[Mdoggie]

Del Rosario is an LSU commit. @Bone Dog

 

[hoophuskee]

Whoa! Please don't put words in my mouth or attribute things I didn't say. Check your Point 1: My use of "decent" referred to minutes played, not to performance level achieved.

Point 2: Why is raising a legitimate question considered being a downer? Is the Boneyard only a cheering section? One might think the simple act of asking a question rose to a sacrilege.

Point 3: "Why Ines ...Etc.?" Princeton Game!

Point 4 & 5: No-one mentioned anywhere that UConn's philosophy is wrong. My opinion of UConn and its wonderful program is both by paying an outrageous monthly Spectrum subscription to watch them, and by donating to UConn.

BTW - I think GOAT Geno's best coaching performance in the 10 years I've been following the team was last year. They didn't win the championship, faced adversity and injury, yet he got the team to the final. What's not to like?

I’m hoping my reply won’t; get us into a fight. It’s not my intention. But it sure sems like you are criticizing Geno’s philosophy.

If you’re not saying Ines a decent player then what player are you saying that she is? Are you saying she is a good player? A “good” player very close to to the level of Muhl? Because the other guards/sf’s are also much better than Ines, aren’t they? If they are much better and the team hasn’t played much together as a whole this year then why wouldn’t you want to give the better players more time? They are already very behind nearly all other top teams. .

I’m sorry if I took your thread wrong but you did refer to as “logical” to play Ines more. Or am I wrong about that? And Geno didn’t play Ines more, right? So if he isn’t doing something that you deem as “logical,” then how is that you are not criticizing him? IMO now that the team got Azzi and Edwards back it’s a bit of a downer to start a thread criticizing Geno’s substitution philosophy. If you’re not then why say it’s logical that she should be getting more minutes? Unless you are saying you expect UCONN to get on a ‘excellence roil” and start wiping out teams and then eventually give her more minutes? If we show consistency and are great to that level then yes I agree.

But back to “philosophy,” similarly just as you refer to “Princeton” it appears you (and I’m sure others on here feel same way as you. It’s okay we disagree though.) that your “cautious/scared of future injuries. Looking at how Geno played his lineup this past game and his history, how often has he shown you to be “cautious” in spreading minutes in fear of potential future injury?

So how is it that you aren’t criticizing his philosophy if he is not playing Ines as your logic dictates and he is not being cautious thinking of “Princeton” in the manner you are?

Please don’t take my post the wrong way. Thought this could be a fun discussion on playing last few players on Bench vs Core. Until the team shows “excellence consistency, the manner they may be up by 30 points so they should automatically dump the Starters imo is wrong. Just because you are beating some over-macthed teams by 30 doesn't mean you are playing well. So, l' m in favor of playing “Core” as much as Geno thinks. So, I don’t want to sound “hostile” – I just have a friendly disagreement of “Bench” vs “Core.” Especially at this moment. “The Core” needs to play. We’re behind nearly every other top team in wcbb in this regard.

 

[NY Fan]

I’m hoping my reply won’t; get us into a fight. It’s not my intention. But it sure sems like you are criticizing Geno’s philosophy.

If you’re not saying Ines a decent player then what player are you saying that she is? Are you saying she is a good player? A “good” player very close to to the level of Muhl? Because the other guards/sf’s are also much better than Ines, aren’t they? If they are much better and the team hasn’t played much together as a whole this year then why wouldn’t you want to give the better players more time? They are already very behind nearly all other top teams. .

I’m sorry if I took your thread wrong but you did refer to as “logical” to play Ines more. Or am I wrong about that? And Geno didn’t play Ines more, right? So if he isn’t doing something that you deem as “logical,” then how is that you are not criticizing him? IMO now that the team got Azzi and Edwards back it’s a bit of a downer to start a thread criticizing Geno’s substitution philosophy. If you’re not then why say it’s logical that she should be getting more minutes? Unless you are saying you expect UCONN to get on a ‘excellence roil” and start wiping out teams and then eventually give her more minutes? If we show consistency and are great to that level then yes I agree.

But back to “philosophy,” similarly just as you refer to “Princeton” it appears you (and I’m sure others on here feel same way as you. It’s okay we disagree though.) that your “cautious/scared of future injuries. Looking at how Geno played his lineup this past game and his history, how often has he shown you to be “cautious” in spreading minutes in fear of potential future injury?

So how is it that you aren’t criticizing his philosophy if he is not playing Ines as your logic dictates and he is not being cautious thinking of “Princeton” in the manner you are?

Please don’t take my post the wrong way. Thought this could be a fun discussion on playing last few players on Bench vs Core. Until the team shows “excellence consistency, the manner they may be up by 30 points so they should automatically dump the Starters imo is wrong. Just because you are beating some over-macthed teams by 30 doesn't mean you are playing well. So, l' m in favor of playing “Core” as much as Geno thinks. So, I don’t want to sound “hostile” – I just have a friendly disagreement of “Bench” vs “Core.” Especially at this moment. “The Core” needs to play. We’re behind nearly every other top team in wcbb in this regard.

My intent as well is not to fight either, but if possible to discuss. I especially enjoy the process (under the hood if you will) of what makes UCONN WBB the success that it is. The Boneyard is my 1st attempt at social media, and I joined in order to discuss and ask questions for clarification and insight. At times it has appeared that the simple act of asking a question on the Boneyard is taken as a criticism of Geno or an affront to Geno and the program. That's unfortunate.

My point in raising the question of substitution was in the context that this having been a calamitous injury season, we had to cancel a game due to insufficient # of players, CD out 1 game, and Geno being out 4 1/2 games (I'm defining St. John as a joint game with CD), so it seemed reasonable to prepare Inez and Amari more. By asking, I'm not implying better insight than the GOAT, I'm simply asking. BTW - You've surely noticed that CD substitutes differently (more frequently) than Geno?

From a health perspective, given the way this season has played out, yes, I'm concerned (not "scared") about future injuries and coaches' health. Is that an irrational concern?

Yes, we have a friendly divergence of views vis amount of playing time for Core versus Bench. Oldude referred to it as a tradeoff, and I totally agree. Ines, has demonstrated flashes of real upside and maturity beyond her years. In advocating for speeding up her (and Amari) development process by playing 5 or 6 minutes instead of only 2 1/2, I'm not challenging Geno, his philosophy, or the UConn WBB program. That is unless the simple act of asking the question does so. Does it?

 

[Longtime fan]

Inez is a real basketball player and has shown flashes of becoming a solid contributor if not a star. Amari not so much, but she too has shown hints on both offense , especially directing traffic and passing from the high post. Logic tells me both can provide decent minutes to a short-handed team whose coaches have acknowledged the team is tired. Wouldn't logic dictate that being up by 30 or so points early in 4Q they should be substituted in both to give tired players a rest as well as to provide them more game experience?

Yes, most sincerely Geno is the GOAT, but I do question the above logic. And also yes, I know playing time is earned, but at least in Inez case if not yet Amari, I thought she already had. BTW - Amari was around the #15 recruit - one above Sonia Citron at ND - so it's a mystery why at 6' 5" she hasn't developed faster. But then it's a mystery to me why Lou at nearby Fairfield wasn't noticed sooner.

I agree that Ines is already looking like a competent player, with upside. She can certainly be counted on to provide quality minutes at the point, when needed. With both Nika and Azzi healthy, that need is somewhat diminished. Next season will be an even greater challenge, if Paige is healthy, Azzi and Nika are healthy and KK has joined the competition. In other words, Ines is going to have to improve exponentially to earn any time at all. And, sadly, she might become candidate to relocate. But she is already an asset for this season. As for Amari, it is hard to believe she was such a highly regarded recruit. I have been a major supporter for her, but she really produces little. Yes, she can stand at the top of the key and see cutters and get the ball to them. And, from time to time, can block a shot under or near the basket. But she has poor ball control and has lost all confidence in shooting. By poor ball control, I mean she has weak or" bad" hands. Her rebounding is accidental not earned. I keep hoping to see more value and maybe the coaches do as well. She did get some nice exposure vs. St. Johns. But had little to show for it. A missed lay up is just not acceptable for offense. So, her opportunity window will close quickly when Ice Brady shows up; not to mention the center from Egypt. I am reminded that Tina Charles did not emerge until her junior year. But I think she showed more, early, than Amari has. Anyone remember?

 

[hoophuskee]

My intent as well is not to fight either, but if possible to discuss. I especially enjoy the process (under the hood if you will) of what makes UCONN WBB the success that it is. The Boneyard is my 1st attempt at social media, and I joined in order to discuss and ask questions for clarification and insight. At times it has appeared that the simple act of asking a question on the Boneyard is taken as a criticism of Geno or an affront to Geno and the program. That's unfortunate.

My point in raising the question of substitution was in the context that this having been a calamitous injury season, we had to cancel a game due to insufficient # of players, CD out 1 game, and Geno being out 4 1/2 games (I'm defining St. John as a joint game with CD), so it seemed reasonable to prepare Inez and Amari more. By asking, I'm not implying better insight than the GOAT, I'm simply asking. BTW - You've surely noticed that CD substitutes differently (more frequently) than Geno?

From a health perspective, given the way this season has played out, yes, I'm concerned (not "scared") about future injuries and coaches' health. Is that an irrational concern?

Yes, we have a friendly divergence of views vis amount of playing time for Core versus Bench. Oldude referred to it as a tradeoff, and I totally agree. Ines, has demonstrated flashes of real upside and maturity beyond her years. In advocating for speeding up her (and Amari) development process by playing 5 or 6 minutes instead of only 2 1/2, I'm not challenging Geno, his philosophy, or the UConn WBB program. That is unless the simple act of asking the question does so. Does it?

I agree with your sentiment on fun open discussion. If we disagree that is fine. So, back on subject as far injuries, what I noticed was before Geno got sick he spoke of how everything going on made his team both physically and mentally tired. Then CD said the same thing a game or so later.

So with all that said, what happened in the ST Johns game? Geno played his Core. And as I referred to my 1st post on this thread above (I forgot to mention the post #) but the poster UConnCat on post #89 on the UCONN ST Johns postgame thread had a direct quote from CD in which she stated the team is in a good place now. So if both coaches clearly stating warning signs before are now no longer harping on the past warnings, then why should we? They are “telling us things are different now,” aren’t they? They weren’t hiding the team’s issues before. IMO this is a great sign that Geno did this with his Core. Why wouldn’t these two – the greatest wcbb duo ever-make anyone feel uncomfortable with their decisions if they are both saying the same thing but now in a positive way? When things were sort of bad neither hid it. Now when things are looking up, why not get on the same board they are on?

And I did see CD substitutes different than Geno. And I stated that I didn’t like her pattern on past threads. Though it was for so few games I was fine with it. I admit I have a bias though. I grew up in hoop always playing as a guard. But many have biases even imo our UCONN TV Analysts. As a result while I love Kara and Meg (and Rebecca) but they even admit they have low post bias as well. I seriously doubt Sue Bird would have the same view as them. So I tend to think their views have more staying power on a site like this when they support more of what CD was doing, But imo it’s bias but I can still love them even if I think so as I don’t agree. Instead I agree with Geno. I’ve been a fan these many years because I just agree with the “play your best players” and “play fastbreak” which Geno does. He fits exactly how I believe a coach should manage. As a result, I felt he did terrific with ST Johns too.

I could be wrong but that’s why I think your last question does question his philosophy. But in a classy friendly way which you present. You are advocating something he could easily do, but isn’t. Why isn't he? You even mention the 30 point blowouts. Well for years he has had his Core also play in these blowouts working on halfcourt. Not meant one bit as a slam but a legit 2 part either/or question – 1.) You don’t seem to agree with that type of philosophy, do you? You want the ‘Ines” types playing in those 30 pt games? For me, I only want the ‘Ines” types playing when Geno is satisfied with his Core. 2.) Am I probably right to believe that you probably think Ines is better than what Geno thinks?

 

[JRRRJ]

When I compare Patterson ver DeBerry for minutes, I look for certain needs. If you need defense, its starting to look like an Amari lean. She has a 4-5+ inch height advantage with her long arms and can stop many shots just by standing in front. Both are foul prone, but Patterson is a foul machine - difficult to put her into close games. Offensive players avoid DeBerry while they often shoot over Patterson or drive into her, forcing fouls. Neither is a great offensive player but DeBerry's height allows her to look over the defense and she lately has been a better passer. Just like I love my children equally, I value Patterson's and DeBerry's contributions but their current skills are becoming more obvious. Predict Amari will begin getting more of the "first big off the bench" minutes.

Ayanna's foul rate (7.29 per 40 minutes) is slightly less than Amari's (7.67). She has a much lower TO rate (2.87 vs. 6.00) and is a much better FT shooter (72.0% vs 36.4%). It's not obvious to me who should be first off the bench from watching their in-game play.

Also, offensive players in the past few years have started copying the stuff we first saw and hated in Notre Dame's play -- jump into the defensive player while shooting, fall down and hope for the foul call. There's nothing the defensive player can do to stop that, and the refs seem to be on the offensive player's side most often.

 

[Bone Dog]

Also, offensive players in the past few years have started copying the stuff we first saw and hated in Notre Dame's play -- jump into the defensive player while shooting, fall down and hope for the foul call. There's nothing the defensive player can do to stop that, and the refs seem to be on the offensive player's side most often.

I am so with you on this one! And players are coached to play this way now. It's not their fault if their coaches encourage this. I have a list, and I'm checking it twice, of worst offending teams... and I'll keep it to myself (You know who you are!).

Actually, in a game against UNC, Leigha Brown of Michigan got a technical for complaining to a ref about these calls. The refs huddled afterwards, and I suspect they knew they'd been giving out to many easy whistles on fake fouls. The result was they called hardly any fouls for the rest of the game... and it turned out to be a much better game because of it. I wish this could be taken as a lesson in more games.