|
Post by WahineFan44 on Dec 23, 2014 21:53:32 GMT -5
Two Hamson's would have an impact? Meh, doubt it. You could build a great 6-2 out of the All-Americans from the West. Vansant and Gardner on the left. Hamson and Lowe on the right. Ajanaku and Sybeldon in the middle. Foss and Bugg setting. (You would have to add one of the many very good Western liberos who were not named to the All-American lists. Or maybe convert Burgess.) McLaughlin as the coach. Give that team a season to play together and see if there would be any doubt about the 6-2 being able to win. ======================== The point here, though, is to ask if playing someone like Foss or Bugg all the way around would really make up for losing any one of those OHs off the court? I think not. The choice to use a 6-2 is made based on your hitters, not so much based on your setter(s). You would honestly put SYBELDON over lutz? I mean she's great, but imo, Lutz is better
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Dec 23, 2014 22:00:52 GMT -5
You could build a great 6-2 out of the All-Americans from the West. Vansant and Gardner on the left. Hamson and Lowe on the right. Ajanaku and Sybeldon in the middle. Foss and Bugg setting. (You would have to add one of the many very good Western liberos who were not named to the All-American lists. Or maybe convert Burgess.) McLaughlin as the coach. Give that team a season to play together and see if there would be any doubt about the 6-2 being able to win. ======================== The point here, though, is to ask if playing someone like Foss or Bugg all the way around would really make up for losing any one of those OHs off the court? I think not. The choice to use a 6-2 is made based on your hitters, not so much based on your setter(s). You would honestly put SYBELDON over lutz? I mean she's great, but imo, Lutz is better Without hesitation. Lutz is very good, but her stats were inflated due to the situation Stanford found themselves in with relatively weak OHs. They had to run a middle-based offense, and they did. Besides, what you really need in this situation from your middles is blocking, and Sybeldon out-blocked Lutz. If I were to put Lutz in instead of one of the other two, it would actually be Inky I would drop off. (For that same reason, I thought about maybe putting that BYU middle in there with Sybeldon. It's just hard to think deliberately leaving Inky off the court can possibly be a good thing.) BLOCKS Cl S BS BA Total Avg/S 1. Sybeldon JR 72 2 103 105.0 1.46 2. Bettinson SR 80 13 95 108.0 1.35 3. Lutz FR 74 15 74 89.0 1.20 4. Bateman SR 79 4 91 95.0 1.20 5. Pfefferle FR 78 10 80 90.0 1.15 6. Wade JR 72 4 78 82.0 1.14 7. Nassar SR 78 13 68 81.0 1.04 8. Trueman FR 70 2 70 72.0 1.03 9. Ajanaku JR 74 11 63 74.0 1.00 Ogoms JR 67 11 56 67.0 1.00
Sybeldon didn't have a lot of solo blocks, but that's because Washington's bunch blocking schemes means they almost never leave anyone to block 1-1.
|
|
|
Post by WahineFan44 on Dec 23, 2014 22:07:12 GMT -5
You would honestly put SYBELDON over lutz? I mean she's great, but imo, Lutz is better Without hesitation. Lutz is very good, but her stats were inflated due to the situation Stanford found themselves in with relatively weak OHs. They had to run a middle-based offense, and they did. I guess you could make an argument there. Sybeldon was severely under utilized due to Vansant, and you could make a case that had she been with a middle based offense, she would shine, but you can also make a case that it would hurt her because she would draw more blockers (inky and lutz usually draw more blockers) or would make more errors, thus lowering her oercentage. For what it's worth, I would take lutz, but SYBELDON would be my third choice, and nearly my second.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Dec 23, 2014 22:17:14 GMT -5
If you have Gardner and Vansant and Lowe and Hamson out on the pins, your middles are not going to be the focus of your attack. They are mainly going to be blockers.
|
|
|
Post by sandnut on Dec 24, 2014 1:43:07 GMT -5
imo, a better setter than hitter. Just one opinion. Remember you heard it here first. Nebraska's 6'5 setter was a different athlete. How many times over the past week did you hear Karch marvel over Lutz' ball control? It's coming... While I admire Plummer's setting -- which is good for a 6'5, her future is on the right side hitting and blocking. I have seen her play before (maybe couple of years back), her best asset is blocking and hitting. The fact that she led the US Girl's team (? Was it youth team) both in kills and blocks supports my argument.
|
|
|
Post by sistahsledge on Dec 24, 2014 5:22:45 GMT -5
The last time I can remember a team winning a National Championship with a true 6-2 offense (two setter/hitters playing all six rotations) was when Stanford did it with Cary Wendell and Lisa Sharpley. With all the big, athletic setters out there now, do you think any coach would be bold enough to try that offense?
|
|
|
Post by sandnut on Dec 24, 2014 12:20:55 GMT -5
Plummer was selected to the US Girl's Youth as a Setter according to USA roster. An OH injury forced Stone to use her in a more attacking role. She played six rotations, led the team in kills, blocks and was second in digs. She had never been in serve receive but passed nails. Her future is most likely as a RS, but she does present several options for coaches and systems.
|
|
|
Post by hammer on Dec 24, 2014 13:41:29 GMT -5
Plummer was selected to the US Girl's Youth as a Setter according to USA roster. An OH injury forced Stone to use her in a more attacking role. She played six rotations, led the team in kills, blocks and was second in digs. She had never been in serve receive but passed nails. Her future is most likely as a RS, but she does present several options for coaches and systems. Plummer at RS will play very much like Kerry Walsh, one of the few RS hitters who could successfully set a one.
|
|
|
Post by doubleplay on Dec 24, 2014 13:58:10 GMT -5
You can run a 6-2 and can win a NC but you need two good setters(not great because she won't accept) and a great libero who is as good as a setter. UNC started running 6-2 for the last two years and the sum of their team was better than the parts because of ibero Ece Taner who could set and great defensive play from setters. However the lack of two very good pin hitters made them come up short but they made an impact at the National level for the first time in their history after switching to 6-2 offense.
|
|
|
Post by notpriddy (COIF) on Dec 31, 2014 6:30:56 GMT -5
One of the most compelling reasons against running a 6-2 is that most if not all of the top tier setters just don't want to play in that system. It goes against their personality as leaders, it means leaving the floor- (which they hate)- and often the hitters "know" who the 1 setter is which can cause some morale issues. I have often wondered if Edelman would have committed to Colorado had she known that she would end up in a 6-2 system this year. Would Bugg have ended up at Stanford or Hancock at PSU if they were going to play in a 6-2? I HIGHLY doubt it. There may be some girls who are OK in a 6-2 like the setters at WA, but even there I wonder if Beals knew that she would be in a 6-2 for 4 years? Also makes me wonder if Tanner was recruited/promised to be in a Setter/RS hitter role at WA until the injury. I wanted to add that Illinois' spring and early season use of the 6-2 may have been a saving factor for the team in a couple of matches after Coach Hambly began strictly using a 5-1. In these matches the setter in the 5-1 was either playing sick or suffered an ankle injury during play. The coaches and team were able to cobble together a successful group of players on the fly primarily due to the team's experience with the 6-2. Practicing a 6-2 a bit (or maybe using it in a spring match or two) may prove beneficial for a team who will be using the 5-1 regularly during the season.
|
|
|
Post by bigscrill on Dec 31, 2014 13:48:04 GMT -5
I predict Kathryn Plummer (Stoklos type hands) will choose a school based on who wants her to set, opening the door for 6'5" type setters in the women's game and a return to the 5-1. Hands like Stokie = brilliant
|
|
|
Post by bigscrill on Dec 31, 2014 13:49:04 GMT -5
I predict Kathryn Plummer (Stoklos type hands) will choose a school based on who wants her to set, opening the door for 6'5" type setters in the women's game and a return to the 5-1. Hands like Stokie = brilliant Even though Ack had better hands than Randy
|
|
|
Post by hammer on Dec 31, 2014 17:32:38 GMT -5
Hands like Stokie = brilliant Even though Ack had better hands than Randy Yes probably true, but aren't we getting a little off the beaten path. I know this -- if I had two Plummers I'd be running a successful 6-2.
|
|
|
Post by timduckforlife on Dec 31, 2014 17:35:00 GMT -5
I'd have to say that a 6-2 will win a national championship at some point. It's just going to happen. The rules of the collegiate game, while not favoring it necessarily, to make it extremely and easily workable.
I think that regardless every coach has a 6-2 option available to them and a 5-1, it just depends on personnel, and that depends on recruiting. And really it most likely comes down to reduction of weakness'.
Is it better to have another hitter and 2 setters rotating in and out? Is it better defensively? Do you have 2 good opposites? Is your setter effective going over on 2, can they block?
IMO, not too much different than taking a hitter out for a DS. You lose a backrow attack but gain better defense. It's just a matter of playing to the strengths of the team and the players you have.
There's also the slight mildly hybrid change like what USC did near the end of the year. Shorter better floor defensive setter playing backrow, taller better blocking setter in the front row. Again just depends on the personnel.
IMO, a great coach will have all of them ready in their arsenal as well as a couple of other options should the need arise, and to have his players ready to implement them if needed. For example, there were times for Oregon 2 years ago where they'd sub the setter out for a blocker, and Brenner would become the setter. Just a matter of using all of your players effectively and getting the most out of your team.
|
|
|
Post by coloradokidd on Jan 1, 2015 9:26:09 GMT -5
IMO: Top Teams that run a 5-1 appreciate other Top Teams that run (or have to run) a 6-2!
|
|