[M T]

I do look at all the players.  When reviewing a game on tape, one can watch what each of the players does & how their play influences the outcome, good & bad.  In the January posts, I was looking to understand why Stanford played poorly in some segments, and against UConn.  Amber stood out.  (The recent post involved reviewing just Amber's play because I was responding to the statement on her quality.  It would have been wrong to just use January's performances, esp. since Amber is just a sophomore.)  Two things I specifically look at: (1) whether we had a breakdown in defense that lets the other team score, and (2) whether we were in position to rebound.

I could make only general statements, but they would be without support.  Supporting details come with length.  I promise there won't be an exam later, so anyone who wants to skip the details can skip them.  But if someone disagrees with my statements, they can see the support and perhaps say "Hey, you got that wrong there."

BobK,  thanks for reminding me who you are. (If there's one thing I wish I could change, it would be to remember names better.)  If you'd like to fill me in on why I'm wrong & Amber really is outstanding, I'd welcome it.  But maybe others would prefer that this be done by private messages.

Amber's A/TO ratio is actually better than Bria Hartley of UConn, believe it or not, and very close to Chelsea Gray of Duke, just to drop some big names.

It took me a while to figure out why you made this statement because when I look at
NCAA A/TO stats: http://www.ncaa.com/stats/basketball-wom...vidual/471
I see the following that just doesn't fit what you said.
12. Kelly Faris  Connecticut  2.36  (the guard with the most assists on her team)
23. Chelsey Gray Duke 2.06
44. Bria Hartley Connecticut 1.88
75. Amber Orrange  Stanford 1.67

It then struck me that maybe you had a different number for Amber.  So I checked her conference-only statistics and saw she has a 1.87 A/TO ratio (I suspect you saw 1.9 at the Stanford stats; PAC-12 lists it as 1.87).  1.87 would put her at #45 for the season.

So, Amber's A/TO ratio has improved significantly.  If you look at that in detail, you'll see that her assists are down, but her turnovers are down even more.  This is consistent with what I had observed about her passing.

I look forward to Amber improving even more in the coming two years.  I would be pleased if in two years I can agree that Amber is an outstanding guard.  (Come to think of it, I'd really like to say that before Chiney graduates.  And maybe Amber should be the shooting guard as her FG% and 3FG% are quite good.)

[M T]

I do look at all the players.  When reviewing a game on tape, one can watch what each of the players does & how their play influences the outcome, good & bad.  In the January posts, I was looking to understand why Stanford played poorly in some segments, and against UConn.  Amber stood out.  (The recent post involved reviewing just Amber's play because I was responding to the statement on her quality.  It would have been wrong to just use January's performances, esp. since Amber is just a sophomore.)  Two things I specifically look at: (1) whether we had a breakdown in defense that lets the other team score, and (2) whether we were in position to rebound.

I could make only general statements, but they would be without support.  Supporting details come with length.  I promise there won't be an exam later, so anyone who wants to skip the details can skip them.  But if someone disagrees with my statements, they can see the support and perhaps say "Hey, you got that wrong there."

BobK,  thanks for reminding me who you are. (If there's one thing I wish I could change, it would be to remember names better.)  If you'd like to fill me in on why I'm wrong & Amber really is outstanding, I'd welcome it.  But maybe others would prefer that this be done by private messages.

Amber's A/TO ratio is actually better than Bria Hartley of UConn, believe it or not, and very close to Chelsea Gray of Duke, just to drop some big names.

It took me a while to figure out why you made this statement because when I look at
NCAA A/TO stats: http://www.ncaa.com/stats/basketball-wom...vidual/471
I see the following that just doesn't fit what you said.
12. Kelly Faris  Connecticut  2.36  (the guard with the most assists on her team)
23. Chelsey Gray Duke 2.06
44. Bria Hartley Connecticut 1.88
75. Amber Orrange  Stanford 1.67

It then struck me that maybe you had a different number for Amber.  So I checked her conference-only statistics and saw she has a 1.87 A/TO ratio (I suspect you saw 1.9 at the Stanford stats; PAC-12 lists it as 1.87).  1.87 would put her at #45 for the season.

So, Amber's A/TO ratio has improved significantly.  If you look at that in detail, you'll see that her assists are down, but her turnovers are down even more.  This is consistent with what I had observed about her passing.

I look forward to Amber improving even more in the coming two years.  I would be pleased if in two years I can agree that Amber is an outstanding guard.  (Come to think of it, I'd really like to say that before Chiney graduates.  And maybe Amber should be the shooting guard as her FG% and 3FG% are quite good.)