|
9-1?
Aug 18, 2008 17:40:06 GMT -5
Post by pogoball on Aug 18, 2008 17:40:06 GMT -5
Basically, JLP has correctly concluded that this team won't beat anyone by outpassing them, so she is trying to win with superior net play and athleticism, which is probably why Haneef-Park isn't playing. The double-sub is absolutely necessary for this team to have a chance.
|
|
ache
Freshman
Posts: 98
|
9-1?
Aug 18, 2008 18:19:56 GMT -5
Post by ache on Aug 18, 2008 18:19:56 GMT -5
Basically, JLP has correctly concluded that this team won't beat anyone by outpassing them, so she is trying to win with superior net play and athleticism, which is probably why Haneef-Park isn't playing. The double-sub is absolutely necessary for this team to have a chance. She had to draw to that conclusion at this point ? If Haneef-Park wasn't gonna be playing regularly why did she include her in the list, instead of Barbosa or the other middle block who got left out.
|
|
|
9-1?
Aug 18, 2008 20:07:19 GMT -5
Post by Phaedrus on Aug 18, 2008 20:07:19 GMT -5
My hypothesis is that JLP knew all along that with the existing talent - and I include those that didn't get placed on the 19 person roster - she couldn't afford to play a regular rotation because we would get spanked. She has had to do some crazy stuff to squeeze everything out of the talent that she had. This is why she played the WGP the way she did and is also why she played all the outsides in all different positions both front row and back row. This is also why she is doing the double subs etc with the setters. She knew with the kind of passing she was going to get that she better do some crazy stuff to throw the opponents off their rhythm and to maximize the blocking and defense.
The real genius is knowing when to make the subs and planning which ones to use each game. So far she has done pretty darned well.
|
|
|
9-1?
Aug 18, 2008 20:52:59 GMT -5
Post by silversurfer on Aug 18, 2008 20:52:59 GMT -5
It has not been a sparkling 4-1, that's for sure. They looked horrible against Venezuela, but still won. 5 with a smaller Japan team, but still won. Destroyed by Cuba. Beat Poland in 5 when it didn't matter. One tremendous win against China in 5.
I'd say this is a gutsy tournament so far. They've played through some adversity, and look to be peaking going into the playoffs.
Still can't believe they're passing is as bad as it is.
|
|
|
9-1?
Aug 18, 2008 22:20:53 GMT -5
Post by pogoball on Aug 18, 2008 22:20:53 GMT -5
She had to draw to that conclusion at this point ? If Haneef-Park wasn't gonna be playing regularly why did she include her in the list, instead of Barbosa or the other middle block who got left out. Question 1: Yes, it's the way things are falling into place as the competition has progressed. My reference to H-P's playing time was only for the recent matches. I did not mean to imply that she wasn't contributing over the course of the tournament. Even if she isn't a full-time starter, she is a very valuable substitute and part-time starter. I think JLP has been very creative in her handling of the team and is maximizing what she has available to her. I also agree with her team selections 100% now that I see how she is using her team.
|
|
ache
Freshman
Posts: 98
|
9-1?
Aug 19, 2008 6:13:32 GMT -5
Post by ache on Aug 19, 2008 6:13:32 GMT -5
I see Haneef-Park as one-dimensional players ...
Hopefully you will hold the same opinion after the match against Italy when true colors come out.
|
|
|
9-1?
Aug 19, 2008 11:15:13 GMT -5
Post by rogero1 on Aug 19, 2008 11:15:13 GMT -5
When Barnett and Sunderland are on postage stamps they can say whatever they want. 4-1 is the end result of her coaching and preparation blunders. Blunders??? I suppose you know and can coach this team better than LP???
|
|
|
9-1?
Aug 19, 2008 11:37:17 GMT -5
Post by pogoball on Aug 19, 2008 11:37:17 GMT -5
When Barnett and Sunderland are on postage stamps they can say whatever they want. 4-1 is the end result of her coaching and preparation blunders. Blunders??? I suppose you know and can coach this team better than LP??? Keystone Kid was being sarcastic -- anyone who "blunders" to a 4-1 record and her picture on a national stamp is not really blundering.
|
|
|
9-1?
Aug 19, 2008 12:48:01 GMT -5
Post by Keystonekid on Aug 19, 2008 12:48:01 GMT -5
Thank you Silver. I told you Murina that the US should beat Italy
|
|
|
9-1?
Aug 19, 2008 17:29:20 GMT -5
Post by Murina on Aug 19, 2008 17:29:20 GMT -5
Thank you Silver. I told you Murina that the US should beat Italy ;D touche' Although if you want to play a best of 3, 5, or 7 matches I'd take you up on that...;D This is why we play the games on the court instead of on paper! Now on to Cuba who I have a better feeling about USA beating than I did Italy. If the USA can figure out how to deal with Santos' serves this one is really interesting.
|
|
|
9-1?
Aug 19, 2008 19:27:18 GMT -5
Post by Keystonekid on Aug 19, 2008 19:27:18 GMT -5
Agreed.
|
|
|
9-1?
Aug 19, 2008 21:00:44 GMT -5
Post by pogoball on Aug 19, 2008 21:00:44 GMT -5
<snip> If the USA can figure out how to deal with Santos' serves this one is really interesting. Aye, there's the rub
|
|
|
9-1?
Aug 19, 2008 22:29:08 GMT -5
Post by OverAndUnder on Aug 19, 2008 22:29:08 GMT -5
Aguero usually serves us off the court also, and look what happened today.
If I were a betting sort of person, I would have put USA as a 2:1 underdog to Cuba and a 1.5:1 underdog to Italy for individual matches. But my intuition told me the USA would hang on long enough to win against Italy (whether because of Aguero's situation or other reasons, Italy has executed well, but all tournament something about the team just seems... subdued). Furthermore, I felt that if USA could beat Italy they would achieve some ineffable strength at which point their chances against Cuba are straight 1:1.
|
|