UH vs British Columbia: The Rematch

[ACE]

roy said:

ace said:

I am unclear with the comment about the set line up. With Shoji, you can almost predict what he is going to do with his players. After a few matches in the early season, he doesn't shuffle his line up a whole lot. And a lot of coaches shuffle their line up at the early season. You give the players a chance to prove themselves during game time.

Well, the past 3 years hasn't been a done deal for Shoji (remember in 2004, if Eckmier didn't get injured, Prince might not have ended up in the middle)...in 2005, with injuries to Mason and Hittle, he shifted line-ups....2006 sort of the same thing. My concern is that it almost seems like injuries have to take place before Wilton/Shoji decides on who's the SET starting line-up (but by then it's by default). I'm no expert, but I thought Mason should've been on the OH to start and not right, if hittle didn't get hurt, do you think she would have made the move?

For the mens, I think Grgas needs to be one of the OH's, I don't care if it's OPP or L2, he needs to be there. HOpefully when Hakala returns, he doesn't bench Grgas.

[bunnywailer]

I have no idea why, somewhere along the line, it was determined that Hakala can't pass or play on the left. The first position he played in his UH career was on the left in 2005 when Azenha and Bender took a majority of the swings in UH's offense. It wasn't until last season that Hakala played on the right. He's a gifted, experienced, and well-skilled player. He would be a better fit on the left than just about anyone else on UH's roster. Grgas, in the meantime, is obviously a very talented hitter who can light it up offensively, but probably isn't as skilled as Hakala in his overall game. Opposite would be the best fit for Grgas. Also, since he's significantly taller than Hakala, he has the potential to put up a bigger block against opponents' leftside attacks (although for his size Hakala is a terrific jumper and a very good blocker).

Hopefully the UH coaching staff already sees this and is contemplating this lineup. People in this thread have commented on how good they think UH's middle attack can be, however, you don't win alot of matches with a middle-based offense. Middle Blockers primarily are there to block first, and add what they can to the offense. Even with near-perfect passing the middle gets set only 20-25% of the time. UH's middles are both slow laterally and leave big seams in the block (at least they did last season, have yet to see them live this season). LeBarre was actually the best middle on UH's roster last year because he put up the best blocks and was the best at making the correct blocking reads. Both Dante and Klinger are below average blockers. Even though Dante had some decent blocking numbers, the way blocking stats are kept in NCAA play do not come close to assessing the real blocking ability of a player. Haven't seen Rawson in a match situation yet, but if he's quicker and a better blocker than either Dante or Klinger, then he needs to play.

[bunnywailer]

You know, in going back to research UH's rosters from previous years (thanks Mike Ching for your great website), I cannot believe from a talent perspective that UH didn't just tear up the league in 2003/2004/2005. Holy crap they had alot of talent, on paper. But Azenha's volatility on-court and inconsistency from night to night never allowed him to become the second coming of Yuval Katz (which many predicted he would fulfill), we all know what happened to Delano Thomas, and Jose Delgado's best season was probably his freshman season as he was another guy that was tremendously talented but just never seemed to get to that level everyone thought he would get to in his college career. Call it lack of focus or drive or whatever, who knows.

By comparison, this year's UH squad just doesn't have the same level of talent. Too bad because I really wanted to see Beckwith leave with at least one NCAA title.

[roy]

ace said:

Well, the past 3 years hasn't been a done deal for Shoji (remember in 2004, if Eckmier didn't get injured, Prince might not have ended up in the middle)...in 2005, with injuries to Mason and Hittle, he shifted line-ups....2006 sort of the same thing. My concern is that it almost seems like injuries have to take place before Wilton/Shoji decides on who's the SET starting line-up (but by then it's by default). I'm no expert, but I thought Mason should've been on the OH to start and not right, if hittle didn't get hurt, do you think she would have made the move?

Maybe I am still unclear about the point, because you have to shift your line up to accomidate for injuries. Eckmier's injury in 2004 did allow Prince to start in the middle instead of the right. But that was only one position. She moved to the middle and the right side. After that, the line up was pretty much set except for some general substitutions. And with Shoji, he tends to allow the right side to be completely interchangable with the middle. So, I don't see that as a huge line up change.

The injuries in 2005 and 2006 kept the line up shifting until it needed to be set by default. I can't really say Shoji moved the line up around until it became necessity. It's not just about the hitter but about how the team functions together. One starter goes down, but you need to account for all the skills that need to be replaced. And before 2004, you knew who the starters were going to be. You can go back to a previous year and predict who he was going to start.

[roy]

bunnywailer said:

I have no idea why, somewhere along the line, it was determined that Hakala can't pass or play on the left. The first position he played in his UH career was on the left in 2005 when Azenha and Bender took a majority of the swings in UH's offense. It wasn't until last season that Hakala played on the right. He's a gifted, experienced, and well-skilled player. He would be a better fit on the left than just about anyone else on UH's roster. Grgas, in the meantime, is obviously a very talented hitter who can light it up offensively, but probably isn't as skilled as Hakala in his overall game. Opposite would be the best fit for Grgas. Also, since he's significantly taller than Hakala, he has the potential to put up a bigger block against opponents' leftside attacks (although for his size Hakala is a terrific jumper and a very good blocker).

Hopefully the UH coaching staff already sees this and is contemplating this lineup. People in this thread have commented on how good they think UH's middle attack can be, however, you don't win alot of matches with a middle-based offense. Middle Blockers primarily are there to block first, and add what they can to the offense. Even with near-perfect passing the middle gets set only 20-25% of the time. UH's middles are both slow laterally and leave big seams in the block (at least they did last season, have yet to see them live this season). LeBarre was actually the best middle on UH's roster last year because he put up the best blocks and was the best at making the correct blocking reads. Both Dante and Klinger are below average blockers. Even though Dante had some decent blocking numbers, the way blocking stats are kept in NCAA play do not come close to assessing the real blocking ability of a player. Haven't seen Rawson in a match situation yet, but if he's quicker and a better blocker than either Dante or Klinger, then he needs to play.

Didn't say Hakala couldn't pass, but he isn't a strong primary passer. His skills have improved since 2005 but last year, he certainly wasn't as strong as Carere and Delgado. That being said, he may be better than the other passers on the court (probably better than Ribeiro and the others). However, being in the passing rotation creates other problems that could hinder his hitting. Looking at his game, he looks like he needs that really strong run up to get a really powerful swing. Being in the passing rotation can hinder that if servers start picking on him for the serve.

However I do agree that Grgas on the right has the potential to be really good in being able to put up a bigger block. And another factor to consider is that Grgas gives Hawaii a competely different look. Many teams play Hawaii are used to their shorter, faster outside hitters. Throwing in a really tall player changes the look for Hawaii and can completely throw off the defense in block timing and dig positioning. That could be especially beneficial if Hakala and Grgas are "roaming" and hitting from both sides. However, Hawaii's main concern should be passing because without that fast offense, Hawaii can't go hitter to hitter against some of the top teams.

I disagree with your assessment on the middles. Middle blockers v. middle hitters is a completely different philosophical point. While they are generally the same, you can see the difference in philosophy behind it. I believe it was Scates who first brought it into the college game in the 70's (don't quote me on this), but the idea was that the middles job was to be a constant offensive threat over being a blocker. As this was during traditional scoring, the offense should be so potent that they be able to side out almost all the time. They wouldn't worry as much about the block, as they could get the serve right back. That puts so much pressure on the opposing team to get their side out that it pressures them to try to get the kill and that causes errors.

Hawaii's middle need to be involved in the offense to open up the outside. If their middles were weaker in attacking, opposing teams can cheat on the outsides. By being an offensive threat, that allows the opposing team to at least take a second to stay with the middle. And the outsides should be good enough to take advantage of that seam in the block to get the kill.

I do agree that Klinger is slow in reading the opposing setter, however Dante I disagree with. He reads the pretty well and while his technique needs some work, he has the ability to stop the opposing hitters. La Barre didn't impress me as a blocker. He was tall but didn't have the raw strength that Dante did in going up against power hitters. And Dante did lead the MPSF in blocks last year with shorter outside hitters supporting him, so I'm not quite sure how the way stat keeping in the NCAA comes into play.

And I will both disagree and agree with you regarding the previous season. In 2003 and 2005, Hawaii should have done better. 2003 had some very unusual loses, such as loses to Northridge, UCI, and Stanford. Hawaii did well but just ran into a tough BYU team in Malibu that cost them a shot to the Final Four. 2005 had the talent in Hakala, Delgado, Carere (though partly injuried), Azneha, and La Barre. That was a disappointment that they couldn't advance farther than they did. However part of that has to be credited to their schedule. That was the year when they had to face Long Beach, BYU, and UCLA on the road which accounted for 4 of their 9 nine loses. I can't blame them for 2004. The talent was still young and Hawaii just loss their 3 starting outsides in Costas, Ching, and Zimet who were all starting passers at some point in time. The talent was young with Bechwith as a freshman (beating out Tuyay), Reft and Carere just transferred in, and La Barre just came back from his mission trip. This was a rebuilding year, so I can't blame them for not being as strong as they should have been.

[zodrow]

WOW so much messages about da UH men's vball dis past matches! So we didn't win but dats ok. I'm not sure if they were really nerous cause it was their first matches since they started practice beginning of da year. All they all have to do is to stay positive, have faith and work hard as ever thoughout da season and they're be fine! I really think it's da coach fault! Plus he made two players sick! He shouldn't be there when he's sick! I luv seeing everyone play but he doesn't know how to coach for real! He's just put anyone in and just hope dat player does something right when he can just tell them what to do! Only one player didn't play on da second match. Ya know wat, I really have faith in these players and not in dat coach!
Anyway, I'm so hapy dat Steven prove he can play cause he didn't let him even suit up! I heard he got in a fight with da coach which I'm sure coach is wrong cause Tino was backing up Steven! Even though Hakala was sick, I really hope he keep Steven in da line-up! Dio, Kyle and Matt was doing awesome in da middle! Mike was outstanding as a libero for Ric after game one! He rarely let a ball drop! Ric is also good in game one! Eric is dis energy ball who jump up and down really fast whenever we get a point, it's awesome! I sure hope he doesn't get hurt doing dat cause one time he almost did. As for everyone else on da team, doing wonderful! Don't ever give up cause Hawaii got you're back!

[ACE]

roy said:

ace said:

Well, the past 3 years hasn't been a done deal for Shoji (remember in 2004, if Eckmier didn't get injured, Prince might not have ended up in the middle)...in 2005, with injuries to Mason and Hittle, he shifted line-ups....2006 sort of the same thing. My concern is that it almost seems like injuries have to take place before Wilton/Shoji decides on who's the SET starting line-up (but by then it's by default). I'm no expert, but I thought Mason should've been on the OH to start and not right, if hittle didn't get hurt, do you think she would have made the move?

Maybe I am still unclear about the point, because you have to shift your line up to accomidate for injuries. Eckmier's injury in 2004 did allow Prince to start in the middle instead of the right. But that was only one position. She moved to the middle and the right side. After that, the line up was pretty much set except for some general substitutions. And with Shoji, he tends to allow the right side to be completely interchangable with the middle. So, I don't see that as a huge line up change.

The injuries in 2005 and 2006 kept the line up shifting until it needed to be set by default. I can't really say Shoji moved the line up around until it became necessity. It's not just about the hitter but about how the team functions together. One starter goes down, but you need to account for all the skills that need to be replaced. And before 2004, you knew who the starters were going to be. You can go back to a previous year and predict who he was going to start.

And that was my point also..in years past...you could predict who the starters were and therefore the chemestry was already there and less pressure, I think....and we all know that from those years of knowing who'd start, those teams were simply awesome. Now, look at the years where the line-up wasn't so predictable...by the time Hawaii reached full-strength..it was too little too late. See, when you shift line-ups, it'll take time and a couple of loses to figure out the correct kinks. But, when you figure out those kinks (as Hawaii seems to do "late" in the season)....they usually don't have that extra loss to fix it, it's tournament time and well we know how it ends up.

However, I do see your point. I'm no coach and I know it takes a whole lot to make up a team that consist of 7 starters. I do give Wilton/Shoji credit for doing the best they can with the talent they get in...although very good, not the top 5 type players as other schools get.

[ACE]

roy said:

ace said:

The injuries in 2005 and 2006 kept the line up shifting until it needed to be set by default. I can't really say Shoji moved the line up around until it became necessity. It's not just about the hitter but about how the team functions together. One starter goes down, but you need to account for all the skills that need to be replaced. And before 2004, you knew who the starters were going to be. You can go back to a previous year and predict who he was going to start.

Yes, you're right it's by default. My concern is why does it come down to default. Again, I'm no expert, but Mason was always on the left and her numbers were pretty good on the left (in 2005) and hittles numbers were decent on the right (in 2004). Why didn't shoji simply start Mason on the left (I know it was for her injury), but based on what i saw from the first couple of matches of 2006, Mason looked awkward on the OPP position and hittle was not getting it done on the OH position.

[bunnywailer]

roy said:

I disagree with your assessment on the middles. Middle blockers v. middle hitters is a completely different philosophical point. While they are generally the same, you can see the difference in philosophy behind it. I believe it was Scates who first brought it into the college game in the 70's (don't quote me on this), but the idea was that the middles job was to be a constant offensive threat over being a blocker. As this was during traditional scoring, the offense should be so potent that they be able to side out almost all the time. They wouldn't worry as much about the block, as they could get the serve right back. That puts so much pressure on the opposing team to get their side out that it pressures them to try to get the kill and that causes errors.

Hawaii's middle need to be involved in the offense to open up the outside. If their middles were weaker in attacking, opposing teams can cheat on the outsides. By being an offensive threat, that allows the opposing team to at least take a second to stay with the middle. And the outsides should be good enough to take advantage of that seam in the block to get the kill.

I do agree that Klinger is slow in reading the opposing setter, however Dante I disagree with. He reads the pretty well and while his technique needs some work, he has the ability to stop the opposing hitters. La Barre didn't impress me as a blocker. He was tall but didn't have the raw strength that Dante did in going up against power hitters. And Dante did lead the MPSF in blocks last year with shorter outside hitters supporting him, so I'm not quite sure how the way stat keeping in the NCAA comes into play.

If you were to ask ANY men's vball coach in the country what the PRIMARY function of the middle player is on the court, 95% of them will say "block alot of balls".

NCAA blocking stats are misleading for the following reason: you get 1.0 blocks for a solo, and 0.5 blocks for participating in any composite block (whether or not you actually blocked the ball). So, a pin blocker may have done all the work, and as a middle you can be horribly late getting to the outside to close the seam and just jump late and throw your hands up, and you will get credit for 0.5 blocks if the pin blocker roofs the opposing hitter. I like FIVB blocking stats better, where you only get credit for actually blocking the ball.

Also, if you look at the average NCAA men's blocking averages, they hover somewhere between 1.5 and 2.0 bpg. I don't know what Dante did, but I'll assume it's around 2.0bpg. An average middle in the MPSF will get around 1.6 to 1.75 bpg. So were talking a statistical difference of anywhere from .25bpg to .40bpg, which in raw points equates to about 1 point per 2.5 to 4 games played. That statistical difference is negligible.

In blocking, there are three purposes:

1. Block for points.
2. Touch alot of attacks/slow them down so that the team can transition for points.
3. Deny or take away areas of the court for the opposing hitter and channel attacks toward the defense.

When considering those three areas, #1 happens rarely, #2 happens some of the time, so #3 is the most common task that blockers can perform. A good to outstanding middle blocker is a middle that:

1. Is quick laterally.
2. Makes the correct reads the vast majority of the time and doesn't get faked out and leave pin blockers in one-on-one situations.
3. Is technically sound and puts up a good block - meaning, even when they are out of position they don't just throw their hands up and put up wild blocks. They are disciplined and take away an area of the court from the hitter even when they are late, and the go straight over on the block and do not swing their arms wildly.

Also, in terms of strength vs. blocking prowess, Dante and Klinger may have looked "stronger" than LaBarre last year because they are beefier dudes, but that plays little into how effective they can be as blockers. Jeff Nygaard, two-time NCAA POY and former National Team member and current AVP pro, was one of the most dominant collegiate MBs - but made Nicole Richie look chubby. Brad Keenan - same thing, he wasn't exactly the poster child for Gold's Gym - but he was an outstanding college middle blocker.

UH's current middles might be proficient offensively, but if they don't step up their blocking, UH opponents are going to hit for big numbers this year.

[roy]

bunnywailer said:

If you were to ask ANY men's vball coach in the country what the PRIMARY function of the middle player is on the court, 95% of them will say "block alot of balls".

NCAA blocking stats are misleading for the following reason: you get 1.0 blocks for a solo, and 0.5 blocks for participating in any composite block (whether or not you actually blocked the ball). So, a pin blocker may have done all the work, and as a middle you can be horribly late getting to the outside to close the seam and just jump late and throw your hands up, and you will get credit for 0.5 blocks if the pin blocker roofs the opposing hitter. I like FIVB blocking stats better, where you only get credit for actually blocking the ball.

Also, if you look at the average NCAA men's blocking averages, they hover somewhere between 1.5 and 2.0 bpg. I don't know what Dante did, but I'll assume it's around 2.0bpg. An average middle in the MPSF will get around 1.6 to 1.75 bpg. So were talking a statistical difference of anywhere from .25bpg to .40bpg, which in raw points equates to about 1 point per 2.5 to 4 games played. That statistical difference is negligible.

In blocking, there are three purposes:

1. Block for points.
2. Touch alot of attacks/slow them down so that the team can transition for points.
3. Deny or take away areas of the court for the opposing hitter and channel attacks toward the defense.

When considering those three areas, #1 happens rarely, #2 happens some of the time, so #3 is the most common task that blockers can perform. A good to outstanding middle blocker is a middle that:

1. Is quick laterally.
2. Makes the correct reads the vast majority of the time and doesn't get faked out and leave pin blockers in one-on-one situations.
3. Is technically sound and puts up a good block - meaning, even when they are out of position they don't just throw their hands up and put up wild blocks. They are disciplined and take away an area of the court from the hitter even when they are late, and the go straight over on the block and do not swing their arms wildly.

Also, in terms of strength vs. blocking prowess, Dante and Klinger may have looked "stronger" than LaBarre last year because they are beefier dudes, but that plays little into how effective they can be as blockers. Jeff Nygaard, two-time NCAA POY and former National Team member and current AVP pro, was one of the most dominant collegiate MBs - but made Nicole Richie look chubby. Brad Keenan - same thing, he wasn't exactly the poster child for Gold's Gym - but he was an outstanding college middle blocker.

UH's current middles might be proficient offensively, but if they don't step up their blocking, UH opponents are going to hit for big numbers this year.

Having talked with some of the men's coaches for D1 volleyball, 95% will not say blocking is the primary function. I will say that a majority of the coaches believe blocking is the primary function, however again, it goes into coaching philosophy and what the coach is trying to accomplish with the players. You see good blockers on the bench because the coach wants to get some offense in the middle.

And while I agree that NCAA stats can be misleading, so can international stats. A top middle can be avoided and get no credit for closing the block. If a hitter goes up against a 2 person block and decides to only challenge the outside blocker, the middle may walk out of the match without a single statistical block but did almost everything to create the situation where the team is credited for the block.

I like the breakdown you use to measure a middle blocker. Truthfully, the best statistical way to measure a middle blocker's productivity is opposing hitting percent in the middle's rotation. The middle gets credit for the blocks but also gets credit for correct positioning allowing the defense to transition. As we don't have that information, we can only go by the stats we have.

I completely disagree with your assessment of NCAA middles. For MPSF stats, Dante was the only middle to average over 1.6 blocks per game. Only 4 other middles averaged 1.5 blocks per game. La Barre averaged 1.26 blocks per game. Dante averaged about .5 blocks per game more than La Barre. As block assists is recorded as .5 blocks, Dante was a part of 1 more block per game than La Barre. And while that is only one point per game, the presense of a good middle causes opposing hitters into unforced errors by avoiding the block or trying to tool it.

La Barre was lankey and so were a lot of other top middles. But those middles had speed and technique, and La Barre's technique wasn't as clean as other lanky middles. Klinger isn't really that stocky and I wouldn't consider Keenan to be in the same catagory as La Barre. Nygaard is a great example and I think Naeve is also a good basis for comparison. But La Barre didn't have the technique to make him as effective as these players. So he may have had the lateral movement, but without the technique, he wasn't as an effective a blocker.

[bunnywailer]

Naeve is not a good example of a middle blocker. He was absolutely horrible as a blocker, he drifted alot and he had short arms for a guy that was 6'10". He could, however, pound the crap out of the 31 set - he and Taliaferro connected very well.

LeBarre was a good blocker, the best of the 3 on UH's roster last year. Go back to see the comments Wilton and Reyes made about LaBarre when he returned from his mission in 2004 and they praise his blocking prowess. He wasn't a particularly hard worker, IMHO. He had the physical talent and good footwork, he could have played at the next level (National Team or pro ball in Europe) if he wanted it. Not sure he did.

Klinger may not be beefy, but he has beefy feet. And for a D1 middle, that's not a good thing.

[bunnywailer]

roy said:

Having talked with some of the men's coaches for D1 volleyball, 95% will not say blocking is the primary function. I will say that a majority of the coaches believe blocking is the primary function, however again, it goes into coaching philosophy and what the coach is trying to accomplish with the players. You see good blockers on the bench because the coach wants to get some offense in the middle.

The only men's coach in recent history who would take middle offense over middle blocking would be Dave Deuser. And he's no longer coaching college ball. The 2003 Lewis team (well...just about ANY Lewis team during Deuser's tenure) was absolutely horrible at blocking. Never seen middles get faked out more at the college level than Lewis' middles.

But talk at length with any of the "elders" in the men's game - Beal, Dunphy, Scates, McGown, Shondell, Preston - and even the others who have been at it for a long time - Pavlik, Ball, Knipe, Wortman, etc. They will all say that the primary purpose of a middle blocker is to block first, produce offense second.

There have been isolated incidents where some coaches may have substituted for purpose in the middle blocker position. For example, during Danny Farmer's playing days with the UCLA teams in the late 90's - Scates would often sub him in for Stillwell or Naeve to give opponents a different look to adjust to. Farmer hit quicks at a much faster tempo than Naeve/Stillwell because he was more explosive getting off the ground and had a quicker arm. He was also quicker laterally and better at closing the low seam to the pin blocker, but he gave up some block height because he was a smaller player.

But if you put it to coaches in absolute terms, for the modern game internationally and in college, they will take middle blocking over middle hitting when forced to chose between one or the other.