I think we have a little bit of apples and oranges going on here.
We all know that every player will not be at their best in every game. No matter what side of the Jordan vs LeBron debate you are on, there are (were) days where these players are not the best player on their team, let alone the best player in the league or the best player of all time. You simply cannot be at your best every game due to whatever reason (sickness, matchup problems, opposition schemes, etc.). One of the coach's responsibilities is to put the best team on the court that gives the team the best chance to win.
In the games where you win by 20+ points and the outcome is not in question, obviously the coaching staff have the opportunity to try new things (plays, rotations, positions, etc.) and give more Playing Time (PT) to those on the bench who don't normally get much PT. It is the games, where the outcome is in doubt, that create the interest.
Two questions for you to ponder?
First, a general comment, how much PT to you give to a senior who is averaging 26+ mpg, 21.1% shooting overall, 0% from 3 and 40.0% from the free throw line to "find her shot" and how much PT to you give a freshman who is your highest rated recruit in history to develop her game for benefit in the future?
Secondly, when you look at the team statistics (particularly defensive in the Montana Game and offensive for the last 3 quarters of the Stanford game) and the individual statistics for the GU players who were on the court at the end of each game, can you honestly say that CLF had the players (regardless of their seniority) that gave GU the best opportunity to win that game, on the court in the last 5 (or 10) minutes of the game?
IMO when the game comes down to foul shooting, leaving people in the game who shoot 40% or 67% on their free throws when you have people on the bench who shoot 85+% on their free throws is IMO, ridiculous.
Similarly, when your team scores 23 points the first quarter and follows that up with scoring 12 points (2nd quarter), 12 points (3rd quarter) and 5 points in the first 5 minutes of the 4th quarter, when exactly do you realize the status quo is not working and a change (in scheme, personnel, etc.) is needed?
This is not about coaching philosophy, not about seniors and freshman, this is about making in-game decisions that put the "team" in the best position to win. Can you say, in your opinion, that CLF put the Lady Zags in the best position to win the Montana and Stanford games with her line-ups at the end of the game?
I can't.
ZagDad
We all know that every player will not be at their best in every game. No matter what side of the Jordan vs LeBron debate you are on, there are (were) days where these players are not the best player on their team, let alone the best player in the league or the best player of all time. You simply cannot be at your best every game due to whatever reason (sickness, matchup problems, opposition schemes, etc.). One of the coach's responsibilities is to put the best team on the court that gives the team the best chance to win.
In the games where you win by 20+ points and the outcome is not in question, obviously the coaching staff have the opportunity to try new things (plays, rotations, positions, etc.) and give more Playing Time (PT) to those on the bench who don't normally get much PT. It is the games, where the outcome is in doubt, that create the interest.
Two questions for you to ponder?
First, a general comment, how much PT to you give to a senior who is averaging 26+ mpg, 21.1% shooting overall, 0% from 3 and 40.0% from the free throw line to "find her shot" and how much PT to you give a freshman who is your highest rated recruit in history to develop her game for benefit in the future?
Secondly, when you look at the team statistics (particularly defensive in the Montana Game and offensive for the last 3 quarters of the Stanford game) and the individual statistics for the GU players who were on the court at the end of each game, can you honestly say that CLF had the players (regardless of their seniority) that gave GU the best opportunity to win that game, on the court in the last 5 (or 10) minutes of the game?
IMO when the game comes down to foul shooting, leaving people in the game who shoot 40% or 67% on their free throws when you have people on the bench who shoot 85+% on their free throws is IMO, ridiculous.
Similarly, when your team scores 23 points the first quarter and follows that up with scoring 12 points (2nd quarter), 12 points (3rd quarter) and 5 points in the first 5 minutes of the 4th quarter, when exactly do you realize the status quo is not working and a change (in scheme, personnel, etc.) is needed?
This is not about coaching philosophy, not about seniors and freshman, this is about making in-game decisions that put the "team" in the best position to win. Can you say, in your opinion, that CLF put the Lady Zags in the best position to win the Montana and Stanford games with her line-ups at the end of the game?
I can't.
ZagDad
Comment