[TheFarm07]

[quote author=JJJ link=topic=18490.msg220420#msg220420 date=1515234005]
Not as bad as feared after reading, having seen what transpired with my own eyes.
I am for sure going to tune into the ASU game live and send positive mojo so all of Britt's attempted treys (and Kiana's, and Alanna's, and Marta's, and Alexa's... you catch my drift) find the bottom of the net!

Yeah, in retrospect, it was really our 3-point shooting that was so off. I didn't notice during the game, because of Kiana's trio in the opening minutes that made me think we were hot from behind the arc, but after that we went 3 for 24 the rest of the way, and I literally remember the three that went in - one from Jerome, one from Sniezek, and one from Smith off a fast break. Our bench was 1-12 from three point land, and McPhee was 0-6. And many weren't really contested, so they just weren't going in. Definitely need to improve on that on Sunday, and it may explain why Tara was making so many bench substitutions, to see if she could find a hot hand at the trey. Even Moschkau got a few minutes at the end.

Also, someone brought this up after the U$C game, but if the net effect of the Princeton is that we're seeing more zone defenses, and we have trouble breaking down the zone/shooting treys over it, I'm not sure if I totally understand the benefit of it. I feel like we've faced a zone defense for at least part of each of the last five games, right? In theory, it's supposed to be a rarer defense, so clearly the scouting on us is that we're much weaker at the zone than man. If so, why aren't we orienting our offense around one that is great at breaking down the zone? I feel like that's why Fingall has started getting more time, because she's really effective at the high post in breaking down the zone, but otherwise it seems like I haven't seen much obvious adjustment.
[/quote]

I feel like we play against a zone defense every game. Maybe that's an exaggeration, but in all seriousness, it seems like unless we are facing a top-5/top-10 team like UConn or Baylor, we inevitably come up against a zone defense and as discussed in a previous thread, it's a wonder why we implement a system (Princeton) with a main foil (zone defense) that we historically struggle against.

When we do play against the zone, we are so dependent on shooting over it, rather than try to break it down either through a player at the high post or through another tactic, that our offensive success is reliant on well we are landing our threes that game, which is so risky. It's great when we have players on fire, but if we have an off shooting night (like we did against Arizona), it looks pretty sad that we barely mustered 60+ points against a subpar opponent.

[TheFarm07]

[quote author=JJJ link=topic=18490.msg220420#msg220420 date=1515234005]
Not as bad as feared after reading, having seen what transpired with my own eyes.
I am for sure going to tune into the ASU game live and send positive mojo so all of Britt's attempted treys (and Kiana's, and Alanna's, and Marta's, and Alexa's... you catch my drift) find the bottom of the net!

Yeah, in retrospect, it was really our 3-point shooting that was so off. I didn't notice during the game, because of Kiana's trio in the opening minutes that made me think we were hot from behind the arc, but after that we went 3 for 24 the rest of the way, and I literally remember the three that went in - one from Jerome, one from Sniezek, and one from Smith off a fast break. Our bench was 1-12 from three point land, and McPhee was 0-6. And many weren't really contested, so they just weren't going in. Definitely need to improve on that on Sunday, and it may explain why Tara was making so many bench substitutions, to see if she could find a hot hand at the trey. Even Moschkau got a few minutes at the end.

Also, someone brought this up after the U$C game, but if the net effect of the Princeton is that we're seeing more zone defenses, and we have trouble breaking down the zone/shooting treys over it, I'm not sure if I totally understand the benefit of it. I feel like we've faced a zone defense for at least part of each of the last five games, right? In theory, it's supposed to be a rarer defense, so clearly the scouting on us is that we're much weaker at the zone than man. If so, why aren't we orienting our offense around one that is great at breaking down the zone? I feel like that's why Fingall has started getting more time, because she's really effective at the high post in breaking down the zone, but otherwise it seems like I haven't seen much obvious adjustment.
[/quote]

I feel like we play against a zone defense every game. Maybe that's an exaggeration, but in all seriousness, it seems like unless we are facing a top-5/top-10 team like UConn or Baylor, we inevitably come up against a zone defense and as discussed in a previous thread, it's a wonder why we implement a system (Princeton) with a main foil (zone defense) that we historically struggle against.

When we do play against the zone, we are so dependent on shooting over it, rather than try to break it down either through a player at the high post or through another tactic, that our offensive success is reliant on well we are landing our threes that game, which is so risky. It's great when we have players on fire, but if we have an off shooting night (like we did against Arizona), it looks pretty sad that we barely mustered 60+ points against a subpar opponent.