|
|
Post by doggydaddy on Jan 3, 2021 22:09:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by chicagogg on Jan 4, 2021 9:36:33 GMT -5
Oh frabjus joy! A Doggy's Doghouse! And bonus pix of Logan! Great way to start Monday. Thanks, DD!
|
|
|
|
Post by phil on Jan 4, 2021 10:37:43 GMT -5
You called that right. Massey had them ranked about number 24 I think before the game, they are now number 32. They were a team whose poll ranking differs a lot from Massey and Massey was closer to right as he often is.
|
|
|
|
Post by phil on Jan 4, 2021 10:58:03 GMT -5
On the one hand, this was an exciting game, not just because it was close but because the two teams can usually play basketball. If you have a choice between a PAC 12 game and an SEC game, go for the pac 12 gain, it will be more enjoyable. That said, the final minute of play, while nailbiting, didn't showcase women's basketball at the best. UCLA was up by 11 with three or four minutes to go, but Oregon managed to score 11 straight to tie the game. That part was exciting but then the level of play deteriorated. with about 27 seconds left in the game, and UCLA up by two, Oregon shot and missed and it looks like the ball went out of bounds to UCLA. A long time elapsed until the play resumed. I still don't know whether a timeout was called does anyone know how to check? The officials decided they needed to check the monitor to confirm who had possession of the ball, and both teams were able to huddle to draw up their respective place. That took a long time, longer than it usually does for an official review which is why I wonder if there actually was a timeout called. At the time I thought Close was being too clever, because the situation called for a timeout to talk through strategy but maybe she thought she could get her timeout in while the official review was taking place. Or maybe she called a timeout.
Here is why it matters— if she had called a timeout could advance the ball to the other end of the court, but if she didn't call a timeout she didn't have that option. In any event, the officials decided it was UCLA's ball but they took it out at Oregon's end. It just occurred to me that they took it out on the sideline not the end line. if it was simply an out of bounds call, wouldn't have been taken out at the end line? Does the fact they took it out on the sideline mean that there was a timeout called? If so, what's the rationale for not advancing the ball? I think a coach always has the option to advance the ball if the time is under one minute and a timeout is taken but I'll confess I haven't memorized that rule and maybe I'm missing something
.
Sorry, back to the point, UCLA inbound of the ball to Onyenwere, arguably their best player, and she traveled turning over the ball and giving it to Oregon at their end of the court. They have the ball on a chance to tie it up or take the lead but instead they turned it over. Now UCLA takes the timeout and manages to remember to take it to their end of the court, but the inbound to Osborne and she steps out of bounds. If you watched this play, , you'll see that she got bumped and she tried to argue that the bump is why she went out of bounds but if you watch the replay you'll see that she stepped out of bounds before being touched. It was a good call, and meant that two supposedly quality teams managed to turn the ball over three times in less than 30 seconds. Not impressive.
Oregon got the ball but failed to score, giving UCLA a rare upset over Oregon. I think the announcers mentioned that they are fiftysomething and 2 in their home arena in recent years, so this was a very rare event.
|
|
|
|
Post by doggydaddy on Jan 4, 2021 11:02:07 GMT -5
On the one hand, this was an exciting game, not just because it was close but because the two teams can usually play basketball. If you have a choice between a PAC 12 game and an SEC game, go for the pac 12 gain, it will be more enjoyable. That said, the final minute of play, while nailbiting, didn't showcase women's basketball at the best. UCLA was up by 11 with three or four minutes to go, but Oregon managed to score 11 straight to tie the game. That part was exciting but then the level of play deteriorated. with about 27 seconds left in the game, and UCLA up by two, Oregon shot and missed and it looks like the ball went out of bounds to UCLA. A long time elapsed until the play resumed. I still don't know whether a timeout was called does anyone know how to check? The officials decided they needed to check the monitor to confirm who had possession of the ball, and both teams were able to huddle to draw up their respective place. That took a long time, longer than it usually does for an official review which is why I wonder if there actually was a timeout called. At the time I thought Close was being too clever, because the situation called for a timeout to talk through strategy but maybe she thought she could get her timeout in while the official review was taking place. Or maybe she called a timeout. Here is why it matters— if she had called a timeout could advance the ball to the other end of the court, but if she didn't call a timeout she didn't have that option. In any event, the officials decided it was UCLA's ball but they took it out at Oregon's end. It just occurred to me that they took it out on the sideline not the end line. if it was simply an out of bounds call, wouldn't have been taken out at the end line? Does the fact they took it out on the sideline mean that there was a timeout called? If so, what's the rationale for not advancing the ball? I think a coach always has the option to advance the ball if the time is under one minute and a timeout is taken but I'll confess I haven't memorized that rule and maybe I'm missing something . Sorry, back to the point, UCLA inbound of the ball to Onyenwere, arguably their best player, and she traveled turning over the ball and giving it to Oregon at their end of the court. They have the ball on a chance to tie it up or take the lead but instead they turned it over. Now UCLA takes the timeout and manages to remember to take it to their end of the court, but the inbound to Osborne and she steps out of bounds. If you watched this play, , you'll see that she got bumped and she tried to argue that the bump is why she went out of bounds but if you watch the replay you'll see that she stepped out of bounds before being touched. It was a good call, and meant that two supposedly quality teams managed to turn the ball over three times in less than 30 seconds. Not impressive. Oregon got the ball but failed to score, giving UCLA a rare upset over Oregon. I think the announcers mentioned that they are fiftysomething and 2 in their home arena in recent years, so this was a very rare event. This post might just end up in my next blog..lol. You ready to start contributing to it again!?? |
|
|
|
Post by phil on Jan 4, 2021 11:03:09 GMT -5
As lopsided as that sounds, it was even worse than the final score suggests. At the end of three quarters Arizona was up 59-20, yes, a point short of tripling them up. Only by taking the foot off the gas pedal, so that California outscored Arizona 13-10 in the final quarter did the score transition from ridiculously lopsided to merely lopsided.
|
|
|
|
Post by swash on Jan 4, 2021 13:53:19 GMT -5
As lopsided as that sounds, it was even worse than the final score suggests. At the end of three quarters Arizona was up 59-20, yes, a point short of tripling them up. Only by taking the foot off the gas pedal, so that California outscored Arizona 13-10 in the final quarter did the score transition from ridiculously lopsided to merely lopsided. What, no full court press and layup line when the golden bears had lost their will to live? How could they let Kim down like that? You'd think Tara had ... class, or something. |
|
|
|
Post by phil on Jan 4, 2021 18:35:56 GMT -5
As lopsided as that sounds, it was even worse than the final score suggests. At the end of three quarters Arizona was up 59-20, yes, a point short of tripling them up. Only by taking the foot off the gas pedal, so that California outscored Arizona 13-10 in the final quarter did the score transition from ridiculously lopsided to merely lopsided. What, no full court press and layup line when the golden bears had lost their will to live? How could they let Kim down like that? You'd think Tara had ... class, or something. Tara? Do you mean Adia, or did I miss something? |
|
|
|
Post by swash on Jan 4, 2021 20:18:01 GMT -5
What, no full court press and layup line when the golden bears had lost their will to live? How could they let Kim down like that? You'd think Tara had ... class, or something. Tara? Do you mean Adia, or did I miss something? Um... Yeah. Adia Barnes. Sheepish grin. Tara also has class, though. |
|
|
|
Post by linkster on Jan 5, 2021 1:10:09 GMT -5
Here's a wild prediction, McClean will have Baylor thinking that Davis' ghost is haunting them.  Her late rebounding with fresh legs is key in the victory. Here's another, he starts Griffin at the 4. She's better equipped to handle Smith. So is Edwards but she needs to be ready to sub in for ONO. |
|
|
|
Post by semper on Jan 5, 2021 7:37:40 GMT -5
Interesting, Linkster. I wish I could watch this game. But I'll be so nervous. Do NOT want us to lose.
|
|
|
|
Post by chicagogg on Jan 5, 2021 9:09:52 GMT -5
Why aren't you watching the game? It's on ESPN, so you should be able to get it in Indiana?? Or are you worried about a jinx?
|
|
|
|
Post by swash on Jan 5, 2021 11:33:01 GMT -5
Here's a wild prediction, McClean will have Baylor thinking that Davis' ghost is haunting them. Her late rebounding with fresh legs is key in the victory. Here's another, he starts Griffin at the 4. She's better equipped to handle Smith. So is Edwards but she needs to be ready to sub in for ONO. I don't necessarily agree with your predictions, but I like them. Here's my thinking. Smith is a cutter (as was Napheesa) and a put-back ace. Aubrey is a better physical match, but her weakness is getting cut behind. That's a worry. Further, Anna and Aaliyah are both better at boxing out, and that really cuts into Nalyssa's productivity. Interestingly, Carrington has been playing the four in their four-guard offense very effectively. That's the place I think Aubrey can have a big impact. She's taller, faster, quicker, and more aggressive than DiJonai. Rebounding will be key, but I am also most interested in how the two teams approach defense. Primarily zone or man? How much helping inside? On paper, both teams are least effective if you force them to shoot from outside. Both teams like to drive and dish, or to get a good post-entry pass. But, either is capable of torching an opponent for selling out entirely with that mindset. Also of interest is this question: Will either (or both teams) try to amp up the pace? In the open court, these teams are very capable. Both have confidence in their fitness and their bench (However deep those may be on Thursday). Will Kim or Geno try to run the other into the ground? Will that strategy prove successful for one team more than the other? If the refs call the game tight, we'll probably see more of Gusters than Egbo. If they let a lot go, it will be the opposite. On our side, a game with a lot of touch fouls supports your idea of keeping Edwards as a backup for when Liv is on the pine. But, if they lean toward "let them play", then we'll want AE and Liv both in there together a fair bit. Gusters is slow and very strong, if she plays a lot we'll need Aaliyah's strength to keep her outside the bunny-zone. If Gusters has a lot of minutes, our four (ONO, AE, AM, AG) will be able to beat her down the court mercilessly, leaving Smith to try and stop our two bigs in the early moments of possessions in our offensive zone. I am sure DiDi will help, that's her forte ... but doing so leaves a certain other freshman uncovered, which might be ill-advised. |
|
|
|
Post by rockymtblue2 on Jan 5, 2021 12:11:05 GMT -5
I might have to invoke the Rocky jinx and hide under the covers for this one.
|
|
Her late rebounding with fresh legs is key in the victory. 
