seems like there are different strategies in the Pac12 (like all conferences)

Cal recruits the athletes and runs the more free flowing motion offense often favored by them

stanford and oregon recruits the skilled, fundamental players and runs a more disciplined screening, cutting, passing offense, with shooters all over the floor

A comparison of our system on the mens side is UCLA. A comparison of Stanford and Oregon's style on the mens side is Utah.

The problem is, stanford also always has a couple of elite athletes and size throughout their lineup

And generation player, Sabrina gives Oregon the elite star they've been lacking

And while Stanford reloads with top talent every year, the recent duck success has propelled their recruiting also

I think a more disciplined, skilled team will usually beat a more athletic team unless there is a major gap. Experience is also the great equalizer. So it really concerns me that this year's veteran team with the best, most experienced player in the conference isn't beating these teams on our home court, and have stumbled a couple times during OOC games (e.g. Harvard). We also lost too many close battles (e.g. UCLA), which I would expect to win as a veteran team.

I think we will be okay this year, but underperform our expectations. We'll reach the tournament, and win the first round, but I felt this was a sweet sixteen and possibly beyond team

But next year?

I agree with everything you wrote. We are an experienced and arhletic team and yet we make more mistakes and do not perform at the end of quarters or in close games with one exception this year.

I dont know enough about basketball to analyze the details, but it was clear yesterday that we opened the game with aggression and free-flowing offense, shooters taking open shots and scoring from others than KA. Then, Beavers went to a zone and we didnt seem to adjust in response other than revert to form. We got passive and started forcing everything in to KA.

Again, I don't know the nuance or strategy well enough to break it diwn, but it LOOKED like one team was making adjustments, finding new ways to attack, and knew who they were and what to do, and the other was just hoping to get hot from the outside or that their All Everything big would rescue them and be able to reel in lobs while double teamed. In short, we got dictated to on our home court when we had the lead, momentum, and the need to win the game.

Our biggest problem now is going to be recruiting. We did quite well when we kept replenishing our roster with really good athletes and posts who could also defend. That has now dropped off substantially.

You know, it may be in our long-term best interests to just let things play out over the next two years and hit closer to rock bottom. If you bring in a new coach now, you probably have to pay an experienced coach a high salary, but don't have a roster that can be changed to a different style of play. If you hit rock bottom as was the case at OSU and Arizona, you can then give a younger coach a lower salary with lower expectations, and ride out a few rough years as they specifically recruit to a revised style of play. Rueck had to have a walk-on try-out during his first year, and it took him three tough early years to get the right kind of roster in place.

HoopDreams said:

---

seems like there are different strategies in the Pac12 (like all conferences)

Cal recruits the athletes and runs the more free flowing motion offense often favored by them

stanford and oregon recruits the skilled, fundamental players and runs a more disciplined screening, cutting, passing offense, with shooters all over the floor

A comparison of our system on the mens side is UCLA. A comparison of Stanford and Oregon's style on the mens side is Utah.

The problem is, stanford also always has a couple of elite athletes and size throughout their lineup

And generation player, Sabrina gives Oregon the elite star they've been lacking

And while Stanford reloads with top talent every year, the recent duck success has propelled their recruiting also

I think a more disciplined, skilled team will usually beat a more athletic team unless there is a major gap. Experience is also the great equalizer. So it really concerns me that this year's veteran team with the best, most experienced player in the conference isn't beating these teams on our home court, and have stumbled a couple times during OOC games (e.g. Harvard). We also lost too many close battles (e.g. UCLA), which I would expect to win as a veteran team.

I think we will be okay this year, but underperform our expectations. We'll reach the tournament, and win the first round, but I felt this was a sweet sixteen and possibly beyond team

But next year?

---

These are good observations, but I would've hoped that we could develop some balance between athleticism and structure. In addition to KA, we have 5 above average shooters on this team, but we never seem to run a play to open up a clean shot unless it's a kick-out from KA. Often when there is an open shot, the shooter dribbles towards the basket or hesitates. When one player gets hot like Brown did in the first half yesterday, we don't have a method of feeding her the ball. I can't believe it is that hard to install a few plays that would take better advantage of our (non-KA) player's strengths.

Although our offense (and sloppy passing) can be frustrating at times, the biggest issue is our defense. Maybe we need to occasionally play those who can focus on defense instead of just playing our best shooters most of the time.

Our style of play shifts with the talent.

In 2012-13, our final 4 year, Layshia Clarendon's mid-range game was our go-to offense in tough games.

Since then, we've based things around Boyd & Gray, and then Thomas & Anigwe.

We'll lose 3 starters next year, and the next recruiting class could be a bust, but there's still enough talent on the roster to keep us respectable through the next two years.

Gotleib doesn't play the reserves much, and tends to go with just 7 players in the big games, but these players have all been worthy of some minutes this season and will do much better with more minutes next season:

G 6'1" Brown, Jr. (current starter)
C 6'4" West, Jr.
C 6'7" Yue, Jr.

G 6'0" Smith, So. (current starter)
F 6'3" Styles, So.
G 5'9" Cayton, So.

G 6'0" Forbes, Fr. (5-star recruit)

That's an acceptable 7-woman rotation, and we'll have a few others who can contribute minutes as needed. The 2020 class should be attractive to star freshmen who want to come in and contribute right away. I'm sure the coaching staff has that in mind.

We'll still be long and athletic, and will probably use it for pressure defense, looking to score on fast breaks off turnovers.

Not including Cayton, those are the same players that can't seem to play any solid defense this year, and with Chen Yue being substituted for the best center in the country, Anigwe.

One problem with the athlete-oriented strategy is that athletes on the West Coast are now being divided up among a greater number of teams, with the rise of so many good teams and coaches in the PAC-12. You now have to recruit also out of the area and internationally. And if you can't coach a team into being greater than the sum of its individual parts, there are a lot of other coaches in the conference who can now do that against you.

I'm not sure we are still exceptionally "long and athletic". IMHO, in order of playing time:
Asha is plenty quick but lacks length.
Kristine is off the charts.
Recee is neither particularly long nor athletic.
Kianna has good length for a guard but is not especially athletic.
Jaelyn is very athletic with average length for a forward.
Kenzie has good length for a guard but needs to work on speed and quickness.
CJ is long enough and quick for a step or two but can't jump well or run for 40 minutes.
Alaysia has both.
Mo is athletic but not long for a forward.

Looking ahead to next year we'll see:
Asha, Kristine, and Mo, all quick, will be gone.
Mi'Cole is very athletic when healthy
Sara and the 3 freshies are unknowns to me.
Will we add another player or two?

IssyBear said:

---

These are good observations, but I would've hoped that we could develop some balance between athleticism and structure. In addition to KA, we have 5 above average shooters on this team, but we never seem to run a play to open up a clean shot unless it's a kick-out from KA. Often when there is an open shot, the shooter dribbles towards the basket or hesitates. When one player gets hot like Brown did in the first half yesterday, we don't have a method of feeding her the ball. I can't believe it is that hard to install a few plays that would take better advantage of our (non-KA) player's strengths.

---

Yup. Biggest frustration for me.