|
Post by gauchofan on Sept 25, 2006 17:49:26 GMT -5
I would like to see more speed and variety in the Gaucho's offense. I would like to see all of the hitters be more proficient in their off-speed shots. But first and foremost, I would like to see tougher serving. And a bigger block. And hotter coffee at the concession. And throw some free t-shirts into the stands. And where are the team posters?
|
|
|
Post by eccola on Sept 25, 2006 19:48:18 GMT -5
I saw the game as well and I agree that when the middle was working, it was really working, especially Quirarte in game 2. Brandt doesn't seem to connect as well with Waldowski in the middle although she seems to score alot of her points on offspeed shots. She did have a couple of strong kills on the "C". As the match went on I don't think that Brandt set the ball high enough for either middle as they seemed to have to drop their shoulders to go get the ball. I thought the tough serving from Cal Poly (#3) was unreal, very dramatic, and they scored quite a few points as a result. But I don't think it was the difference in the game. The serve receive errors were equal for both teams.
I think the passing was actually worse on the CP side, not that it was great on the UCSB side, but the setter does a better job with the passes that she gets. Brandt seems to struggle with passes that are fast and tight to the net. Also the combination of slow-high-outside sets and the gaucho outside hitters was flat not working against the big CP block. I think that was what brought up the Dutro reference. Actually their shorter front row players put up a great block as well as their taller players.
The hitting errors by the two primary outside hitters (both hit negative) was one of the biggest differences between the two teams. 15 hitting errors difference between teams = 15 points.
The other biggest difference was the blocking differential. Traveler said that CP was "more efficient" blocking. I think that's quite an understatement as CP out blocked the gauchos by 17 = 17 points.
I think UCSB needs to keep up and improve their hallmark defense on the ground, get much stronger defensively at the net, and find some offense on the outside. Using Sareceno more may be key.....she's a keeper.
|
|
|
Post by 7thWoman on Sept 25, 2006 19:51:19 GMT -5
Disagree with your other observations about the match-UCSB's offense worked well when the passes were on target- Waldowski, Quirarte and Brandt ran the middle effectively. It doesn't really sound like you do. I said that a lot of Brandt's sets were panic sets didn't I? I thought I was implying that the passes were bad by saying that, but I guess not. Obviously, but what's that have to do with the way they played against Cal Poly? Seems to me that's the entire point of this board. I can't say that a player had a bad night? Numbers. How many of her errors were unforced, whereas how many of Jamie's errors were against a three-person block? The box score doesn't tell you that, does it? I think if you asked Saraceno how she played that night compared to her previous matches, she would agree that wasn't her best performance. She's obviously an asset to the team, I'm just saying she had a rough night. I don't think that's any sort of radical statement. No argument. And we'll see her in a couple of nights. I have never thought much of her as a setter since the first game I saw her set, and I reserve the right to have that opinion and state it here. The comment I made about Brandt thinking she was Dutro was just the thought I had during the match, when I saw set after set going to the outside with the Cal Poly blockers already moving over there before the ball even reached the setter's hands. That simply reminded me of a typical Dutro game. I've seen Brandt mix it up and I know she can play better than she did on Saturday night. Sorry if that comment upset you.
|
|
|
Post by UCSBVball on Sept 25, 2006 22:42:45 GMT -5
When the sets were high and slow and into 3 blockers - it was a foregone conclusion that they would be blocked. Many of the sets would have been better as a safe pass over the net by the setter. No team can survive 3 blockers against one hitter. Cal Polys serves were fast and hard, UCSB was able to pass them, not with perfect passes, but passes, this is when a game plan should be ready, set the back row, set the front row away from the net, or have the setter just send the ball back.
|
|
|
Post by themecca on Sept 26, 2006 0:32:06 GMT -5
maybe the loss is attributed to the blinding glow from stevenson's hair!!!
all this emphasis on the UCSB players...the game has changed and the players aren't making the adjustments perhaps from a lack of coaching and player development...it should be no surprise with the inconsistencies...where is the blocking/defense at the middle...set choices shaky at times even when passes have been perfect...faster offense would be an improvement...as would reduction in mental errors and improved focus...
|
|
|
Post by TheSantaBarbarian on Sept 26, 2006 23:52:27 GMT -5
"Regarding the negative reference to Ashly Dutro- she is currently the starting setter for the 12-2 LMU team."
The 12-3 LMU team.
|
|