Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2014 20:25:32 GMT -5
Kerri's biggest strength is her will to win!! No one in this sport has that pure desire to win like she does!! Unless of course, April now...didn't know how good this team would be but they are quickly making me a believer!!
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Jun 18, 2014 20:42:41 GMT -5
Kerri's biggest strength is her will to win!! No one in this sport has that pure desire to win like she does!! Unless of course, April now...didn't know how good this team would be but they are quickly making me a believer!! Kerri's biggest asset is she is 6'3 and moves like she is 5'8. The idea that the best athletes always have the most desire is a media creation. You know who desperately wanted to win? Scott Skiles. Too bad he had no talent. You think Kerri wanted it more than EY? Or was she just taller and a better athlete?
|
|
|
Post by geddyleeridesagain on Jun 18, 2014 20:58:17 GMT -5
Kerri's biggest strength is her will to win!! No one in this sport has that pure desire to win like she does!! Unless of course, April now...didn't know how good this team would be but they are quickly making me a believer!! Kerri's biggest asset is she is 6'3 and moves like she is 5'8. The idea that the best athletes always have the most desire is a media creation. You know who desperately wanted to win? Scott Skiles. Too bad he had no talent. You think Kerri wanted it more than EY? Or was she just taller and a better athlete? Kerri a better athlete than EY? I'm not sure there's ever been a better pure athlete on tour than Elaine. I agree with goldengirl (one of the few things I think I've agreed with on this entire thread) in the sense that Kerri, like pretty much every great player in any sport, marries a great deal of natural ability (and size) with a ridiculous level of self-discipline, competitive desire and work ethic. You're not going to out-work Walsh.
|
|
|
Post by tree on Jun 18, 2014 21:08:00 GMT -5
It is Kerri's drive to win that makes her so good.She moves on the sand the way she does because during the offseason she trains her ass off. It is what you do away from the matches that determine how well you do in the matches. As far as Ey she was a great player too. I don't think anyone beat Misty(in her prime) and Kerri more than EY with as many different partners. April is a good example of this. The last three or four offseasons she has worked much harder and now she watches her diet much more and you can just see her growing as a player. Having good coaching also helps but only if you listen and buy in on what their selling. Just my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Jun 18, 2014 21:39:08 GMT -5
Kerri's biggest asset is she is 6'3 and moves like she is 5'8. The idea that the best athletes always have the most desire is a media creation. You know who desperately wanted to win? Scott Skiles. Too bad he had no talent. You think Kerri wanted it more than EY? Or was she just taller and a better athlete? Kerri a better athlete than EY? I'm not sure there's ever been a better pure athlete on tour than Elaine. I agree with goldengirl (one of the few things I think I've agreed with on this entire thread) in the sense that Kerri, like pretty much every great player in any sport, marries a great deal of natural ability (and size) with a ridiculous level of self-discipline, competitive desire and work ethic. You're not going to out-work Walsh. It depends on what you mean by a natural athlete. If you factor in height, as you should because we are talking about volleyball, then of course Kerri is a better athlete than EY, because Kerri has that extra three inches. If you are talking about who would win a decathlon, then maybe EY. I am not saying that Kerri is lazy or doesnt work hard, but there are plenty of players that work hard. When Kerri first burst onto the scene, Holly McPeak was in, or just past, her prime. Holly was legendary for her training. Then along came Kerri Walsh who didnt outwork Holly, but she was 6'3, so Holly stopped winning. Take Kerri's work ethic, desire, etc. and put it into Barbara Fontana, is Barb's career any different? Take Kerri's work ethic and desire and put it into Brooke Sweat, does Brooke win three tournaments a year? (no she doesnt). The work ethic, desire, may be why Kerri has 116 wins instead of 80, but the physical gifts are the difference between Kerri and all the other players on tour.
|
|
|
Post by volleyballjim on Jun 18, 2014 21:43:30 GMT -5
It's the killer instinct and error reduction (IMHO)....Some players just can't pull it off. It takes a different mind set to go into a game knowing you will do whatever it takes to finish 2 ahead. Her options and other non-system (if that is what you call it) plays are just a level above others. Smarter plays with less risk yet equal or higher reward. It's how I think of Todd Rogers. He was downplayed for so many years, but toward the end I came to the conclusion that he was the ONLY player I regularly watched (course you didn't have many alternatives if you were watching a final), that only showed you the play he needed to get the point. Not the greatest play to get that point, just the one that fully managed the risk/reward table in the long run would he execute. I would LOVE to look at unforced errors on the pros and see if they corroborate what I think about Kerri and Todd, but man, you can take yourself out of a game very quickly and am sure even quicker on the pro tour with errors...
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Jun 18, 2014 21:45:41 GMT -5
It is Kerri's drive to win that makes her so good.She moves on the sand the way she does because during the offseason she trains her ass off. It is what you do away from the matches that determine how well you do in the matches. As far as Ey she was a great player too. I don't think anyone beat Misty(in her prime) and Kerri more than EY with as many different partners. April is a good example of this. The last three or four offseasons she has worked much harder and now she watches her diet much more and you can just see her growing as a player. Having good coaching also helps but only if you listen and buy in on what their selling. Just my opinion. Again I have to disagree here a little because the way you state things really exaggerates the degree to which you can change your body or abilities. Jen Fopma, Lauren Fendrick, any of the other tall American girls could never be Kerri, or close, no matter how hard they work because the natural gifts arent there. Kevin Wong could have lived in the weight room, done jump training every day, and used steroids to allow him to work even harder, and Jose Loiola still would have been much faster in the sand. Im also not sure that April actually is that much better now. Look at her performance in 2008-2010 versus last year pre-Walsh. I guess a lot of that could be Jen falling off, but I think April is also looking really good now because we are so used to seeing her with an inferior partner (no knock on Jen here)
|
|
|
Post by geddyleeridesagain on Jun 18, 2014 22:27:06 GMT -5
Kerri a better athlete than EY? I'm not sure there's ever been a better pure athlete on tour than Elaine. I agree with goldengirl (one of the few things I think I've agreed with on this entire thread) in the sense that Kerri, like pretty much every great player in any sport, marries a great deal of natural ability (and size) with a ridiculous level of self-discipline, competitive desire and work ethic. You're not going to out-work Walsh. It depends on what you mean by a natural athlete. If you factor in height, as you should because we are talking about volleyball, then of course Kerri is a better athlete than EY, because Kerri has that extra three inches. If you are talking about who would win a decathlon, then maybe EY. I am not saying that Kerri is lazy or doesnt work hard, but there are plenty of players that work hard. When Kerri first burst onto the scene, Holly McPeak was in, or just past, her prime. Holly was legendary for her training. Then along came Kerri Walsh who didnt outwork Holly, but she was 6'3, so Holly stopped winning. Take Kerri's work ethic, desire, etc. and put it into Barbara Fontana, is Barb's career any different? Take Kerri's work ethic and desire and put it into Brooke Sweat, does Brooke win three tournaments a year? (no she doesnt). The work ethic, desire, may be why Kerri has 116 wins instead of 80, but the physical gifts are the difference between Kerri and all the other players on tour. EY was stronger, faster, had a better vertical, could crush the ball, and was a better blocker than Kerri during EY's prime - she could get up and penetrate just as well as Walsh, and read hitters better. EY gave Walsh/May fits for years while always playing with a much lesser partner. Kerri is an outstanding athlete for her size, but without the intangibles she brings to her game she wouldn't be in the conversation for the mythical "best ever." What separates the super-elite player from the rest is combining talent with ultra-competitive desire. Michael Jordan isn't the best player in history simply because he was a better athlete - he was the best ever because he was a fantastic athlete who single-mindedly worked at being better than everyone else. See also: Kobe, Jerry Rice, Karch, Walter Payton etc etc. Walsh is in that group.
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Jun 18, 2014 23:04:46 GMT -5
It depends on what you mean by a natural athlete. If you factor in height, as you should because we are talking about volleyball, then of course Kerri is a better athlete than EY, because Kerri has that extra three inches. If you are talking about who would win a decathlon, then maybe EY. I am not saying that Kerri is lazy or doesnt work hard, but there are plenty of players that work hard. When Kerri first burst onto the scene, Holly McPeak was in, or just past, her prime. Holly was legendary for her training. Then along came Kerri Walsh who didnt outwork Holly, but she was 6'3, so Holly stopped winning. Take Kerri's work ethic, desire, etc. and put it into Barbara Fontana, is Barb's career any different? Take Kerri's work ethic and desire and put it into Brooke Sweat, does Brooke win three tournaments a year? (no she doesnt). The work ethic, desire, may be why Kerri has 116 wins instead of 80, but the physical gifts are the difference between Kerri and all the other players on tour. EY was stronger, faster, had a better vertical, could crush the ball, and was a better blocker than Kerri during EY's prime - she could get up and penetrate just as well as Walsh, and read hitters better. EY gave Walsh/May fits for years while always playing with a much lesser partner. Kerri is an outstanding athlete for her size, but without the intangibles she brings to her game she wouldn't be in the conversation for the mythical "best ever." What separates the super-elite player from the rest is combining talent with ultra-competitive desire. Michael Jordan isn't the best player in history simply because he was a better athlete - he was the best ever because he was a fantastic athlete who single-mindedly worked at being better than everyone else. See also: Kobe, Jerry Rice, Karch, Walter Payton etc etc. Walsh is in that group. No one loves EY more than me but she was not a better blocker than Kerri in her prime. Maybe technically, but in terms of changing shots, touching balls and intimidating players? She just wasn't. Also EY could have won 70 tournaments in a different era, but she didnt give Kerri/Misty fits except that first year. After that I doubt she ever beat them 30% of the time in a single year, and again EY is my favorite rally era player. There are players out there who really are great just because they take good but not great athletic skills and couple them with insane drive. In that respect Sinjin is a much better example than Karch. Kobe is the best of the examples you cited and Holly is the best example from BVB. But mostly the best athlete wins. Take volleyball. When Karch started dominating the tour, there were two players who were close to his physical equal. Stoklos had already started succumbing to injuries and age, and Steffes was his partner. Then it was Steffes, Loiola, Rego, Whitmarsh as the best, or close to the best players for a good long period, then the next time there were really dominant players on the AVP it was Phil and Todd, or Lambert. there is a clear theme here right? Those guys are all the best natural athletes, or close to it, on the tour at the time. There are a few, like (Powers or Ring) that never got there, but those are exceptions that prove the rule. In the NBA its the same, from the time Jordan won his first title, who was the best player in the league? Jordan, then Hakeem when Jordan retired, then Jordan, then Shaq, then Lebron (with maybe a Kobe or Duncan year thrown in there). Thats almost twenty years where the best player also happened to be the most physically gifted. People always want to tell the story as the hardest worker wins, and occasionally that happens (Holly McPeak for example) but in general its the most talented player who dominates. In every sport there are a ton of people that work as hard as the best, but without the talent. For every Sinjin, Kobe, or Holly in terms of all time greats, there are a bunch of Shaqs, Randy Mosses, Kareems, Loiolas, Dalhaussers, Jackie Silvas etc. I think you are wrong about Kerri not being in the conversation for best ever without as much drive. Kerri with just a solid pro's work ethic still wins at least 60-80 tournaments. That isnt enough to get a person in the conversation?
|
|
|
Post by tree on Jun 18, 2014 23:47:55 GMT -5
I feel like we are talking in circles here. I think I will just say we disagree on what makes a champion.
|
|
|
Post by klazk on Jun 30, 2014 10:33:54 GMT -5
Long season, but beginning to think my guess of 12 is going to end up on the low side.
They have 4 wins so far with 6 AVPs and 7 FIVB grand slams remaining (assuming Brazil and the grand slam final actually occur).
They have been absolutely dominating on FIVB so fair this year. They are 29-2, with the 2 losses to 2 different Brazilian teams.
They are undefeated in pool play and have only lost a single set in pool.
Single elimination matches they are 14-2. They only thing I can say to give the other teams hope is that they have gone 3 sets in half of their medal round matches (but winning them all obviously).
Their average margin of victory (including negatives for lost sets) is 6.6 points in pool, 3.3 points in single elimination (including medal round) and 3.6 in the medal round.
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Jun 30, 2014 12:51:30 GMT -5
I was thinking they played a lot of three game matches in Stavanger but looking at that, they are a little more dominant than I thought they were. Do we know which of Chen or her partner is hurt yet? I feel like that could actually make things harder on Kerri/April if the kid is hurt because then Xue gets a better partner in the short term (presumably)
|
|
|
Post by klazk on Jun 30, 2014 13:38:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Jun 30, 2014 14:13:36 GMT -5
I get why that team is a good idea for Chinese volleyball, but I hate it. Why is she playing through it if the injury is limiting her that badly?
|
|