|
Post by stanfordvb on Jan 15, 2019 14:10:02 GMT -5
I see a lot of posts in here regarding setting.... I follow the national team somewhat but not a ton.... are you guys fans of Lloyd? I personally think she does a good job She did a pretty good job in VNL 2018, but her setting had been offline during the World Championship. That's why there are lots of discussion on settings here. The USA offence system relies a lot on the setter. Yes I know, Karch runs the most difficult offense for a setter in the world. But to me the hitter never seem to be in bad situation from balls that she has her hands on.... I still think with time poulter will takeover
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2019 14:46:21 GMT -5
I see a lot of posts in here regarding setting.... I follow the national team somewhat but not a ton.... are you guys fans of Lloyd? I personally think she does a good job She did a pretty good job in VNL 2018, but her setting had been offline during the World Championship. That's why there are lots of discussion on settings here. The USA offence system relies a lot on the setter. Doesn't every team's offensive system rely on their setter?
|
|
|
Post by superfan1 on Jan 15, 2019 16:34:51 GMT -5
She did a pretty good job in VNL 2018, but her setting had been offline during the World Championship. That's why there are lots of discussion on settings here. The USA offence system relies a lot on the setter. Yes I know, Karch runs the most difficult offense for a setter in the world. But to me the hitter never seem to be in bad situation from balls that she has her hands on.... I still think with time poulter will takeover She hasn't had the best connection with her hitters this season in Brazil, which is a little concerning. Perhaps she'll be better come international competition.
|
|
|
Post by ironhammer on Jan 15, 2019 20:08:23 GMT -5
You need to look up a dictionary for that? Misread your post. The OH1-OH2 decision can be influenced by passing formations, blocking pairs, serving rotations (Larson usually serves first for USA and Eczacibasi so you have 3 front row attackers right away), who hits out of the backrow better, etc. Not just "who is more terminal."Pretty poor effort of a troll by you, btw. I expect more. No one implied that. It is you who make stuff up. Reading comprehension problems and a stupid reply. Pathetic, even by your standards.
|
|
|
Post by donut on Jan 15, 2019 20:38:39 GMT -5
Misread your post. The OH1-OH2 decision can be influenced by passing formations, blocking pairs, serving rotations (Larson usually serves first for USA and Eczacibasi so you have 3 front row attackers right away), who hits out of the backrow better, etc. Not just "who is more terminal."Pretty poor effort of a troll by you, btw. I expect more. No one implied that. It is you who make stuff up. Reading comprehsion problems and a stupid reply. Pathetic, even by your standards. I personally am not a huge fan of Larson, at least in the front row. She isn’t a terminal OH in my opinion. I think if larch is looking for liberos as much as he is... Larson would be a good try. But I also do. Or like Courtney or robin on as liberos. Defensively they are not up to par with other liberos. Saucer could make a good bet on cracking the roster because KK is looking for serve receive which she is phenomenal at. I agree about Larson but I wouldn't move her completely, I'm just not sure why she is OH1. Surely Hill or Bartsch are more terminal? Larson imo is much better suited for the OH2 role.lol thanks for playing!
|
|
|
Post by ironhammer on Jan 15, 2019 20:41:06 GMT -5
No one implied that. It is you who make stuff up. Reading comprehsion problems and a stupid reply. Pathetic, even by your standards. I agree about Larson but I wouldn't move her completely, I'm just not sure why she is OH1. Surely Hill or Bartsch are more terminal? Larson imo is much better suited for the OH2 role.lol thanks for playing! Reading comprehension problems AGAIN. She was talking about who could be more terminal, but she did NOT say that was the only thing that mattered. Learn to read. Repeat after me: A is Apple. B is Boy and C is for what?
|
|
|
Post by donut on Jan 15, 2019 20:48:29 GMT -5
Reading comprehension problems AGAIN. She was talking about who could be more terminal, but she did NOT say that was the only thing that mattered. Learn to read, please. Repeat after me: A is Apple. B is Boy and C is for what? Lol cool? And I said there was more to OH1 than "being more terminal" - i.e. there are other explanations for why Larson is an OH1. I never said she said that it was the only thing that mattered. Seriously, what's your deal? Your "outdated" trolling had nothing to do with any of this by the way, so it feels like your grasping at straws a bit here.
|
|
|
Post by ironhammer on Jan 15, 2019 20:51:22 GMT -5
Reading comprehension problems AGAIN. She was talking about who could be more terminal, but she did NOT say that was the only thing that mattered. Learn to read, please. Repeat after me: A is Apple. B is Boy and C is for what? Lol cool? And I said there was more to OH1 than "being more terminal" - i.e. there are other explanations for why Larson is an OH1. I never said she said that it was the only thing that mattered. Seriously, what's your deal? Your "outdated" trolling had nothing to do with any of this by the way, so it feels like your grasping at straws a bit here. My deal? Pointing out your condescending attitude. You said: "OH1 = more terminal, OH2 = better passer is a pretty simple/out-dated". You are implying that she thought that's the only thing that mattered. Which is NOT what she said.
|
|
|
Post by donut on Jan 15, 2019 20:58:14 GMT -5
Lol cool? And I said there was more to OH1 than "being more terminal" - i.e. there are other explanations for why Larson is an OH1. I never said she said that it was the only thing that mattered. Seriously, what's your deal? Your "outdated" trolling had nothing to do with any of this by the way, so it feels like your grasping at straws a bit here. My deal? Pointing out your condescending attitude. Haha and what do you call this: "Repeat after me: A is Apple. B is Boy and C is for what?" "Pot calling the kettle black," eh? My original post wasn't condescending. You've just been caught (again) with zero grounds for your post - or, in simple terms, been caught (again) being wrong. You're obsessed with certain posters on this forum, and it's sometimes comical, but mostly really strange. I'll go back to ignoring you. Happy trolling!
|
|
|
Post by ironhammer on Jan 15, 2019 21:02:31 GMT -5
My deal? Pointing out your condescending attitude. Haha and what do you call this: "Repeat after me: A is Apple. B is Boy and C is for what?" "Pot calling the kettle black," eh? My original post wasn't condescending. You've just been caught (again) with zero grounds for your post - or, in simple terms, been caught (again) being wrong. You're obsessed with certain posters on this forum, and it's sometimes comical, but mostly really strange. I'll go back to ignoring you. Happy trolling! Hey, I treat someone like they treat others. Yes, your post WAS condescending. You are like that little boy with his hand caught in the cookie jar saying "I am not stealing the cookies!".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2019 21:29:13 GMT -5
Haha and what do you call this: "Repeat after me: A is Apple. B is Boy and C is for what?" "Pot calling the kettle black," eh? My original post wasn't condescending. You've just been caught (again) with zero grounds for your post - or, in simple terms, been caught (again) being wrong. You're obsessed with certain posters on this forum, and it's sometimes comical, but mostly really strange. I'll go back to ignoring you. Happy trolling! Hey, I treat someone like they treat others. Yes, your post WAS condescending. You are like that little boy with his hand caught in the cookie jar saying "I am not stealing the cookies!". And I didn’t say being terminal was the be all and end all. But surely you want your most offensive middle and outside hitter to be next to your setter in the lineup. While this setup may be “outdated” for certain people, it is fairly common that you want your most terminal left side in the OH1 position. I stand by my opinion (please note it is simply that - an opinion, not a fact) that she is much better suited as an OH2. Maybe even more so since the US doesn’t have a terminal OPP and hasn’t for years.
|
|
|
Post by stanfordvb on Jan 16, 2019 0:21:20 GMT -5
The dude with the donut picture stays fighting in every thread
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2019 0:32:56 GMT -5
The dude with the donut picture stays fighting in every thread The dude w/ the donut picture - plus the one in the post just above mine - have both been told what Quite A Sizable majority feel about their posts. They seem to not care.
|
|
|
Post by shesasetter on Jan 16, 2019 2:06:14 GMT -5
The dude with the donut picture stays fighting in every thread The dude w/ the donut picture - plus the one in the post just above mine - have both been told what Quite A Sizable majority feel about their posts. They seem to not care. I’m glad I’m not the only one who wishes they would both shut the f*ck up yo.
|
|
|
Post by donut on Jan 16, 2019 9:45:11 GMT -5
Hey, I treat someone like they treat others. Yes, your post WAS condescending. You are like that little boy with his hand caught in the cookie jar saying "I am not stealing the cookies!". And I didn’t say being terminal was the be all and end all. But surely you want your most offensive middle and outside hitter to be next to your setter in the lineup. While this setup may be “outdated” for certain people, it is fairly common that you want your most terminal left side in the OH1 position. I stand by my opinion (please note it is simply that - an opinion, not a fact) that she is much better suited as an OH2. Maybe even more so since the US doesn’t have a terminal OPP and hasn’t for years. I apologize for the "outdated" comment. It was trite. I'm not entirely convinced Hill is more terminal than Larson, especially when you look at OOS balls. Larson handles those much better than Hill. I believe in 2013-2014, we tried Hill at OH1 and Larson at OH2, and it didn't go well for the team. The way the USA system is designed, in-system, our wing hitters should be getting 1-on-1 opportunities, so who is more terminal becomes less of a question (in theory). OOS, we shoot balls to the LS, and (as I mentioned), I think Larson handles those better. At the international-level, your slide attack, as well as your D ball and pipe attack (OPP and OH in the backrow), should be constant in-system threats, meaning blockers can't camp out on the OH1. Hill is also a really good pipe attacker (which is very underutilized by Karch). Larson for Ecz. has been the OH1, while both Kosh and KYK were/are the OH2. KYK and Kosh are definitely more terminal than Larson. Again, I think both Karch and Motta want Larson to start in the backrow for serving and defense, which is even better when you can send your OPP and OH2 across the front row. Larson is a unique enough player and that's why I think the rules are bent a little for her.
|
|