|
Post by wonderwarthog79 on Dec 10, 2019 23:57:07 GMT -5
I also think Washington at their best could beat Baylor. I meannnn I don't care if Plummer was injured in the Stanford match (ok I do cuz Im a KP Stan lol), but Washington made Stanford look like poopie. That's the problem. Washington suffers from JHS (Jekyll & Hyde Syndrome). Sometimes even within a single match. At Utah, they won the first set comfortably, then got rolled by the Utes. In the tournament, they came a couple close plays of being behind South Carolina 0-2, but they won the first two sets, barely. Then pummeled Carolina in the third. When they are on, I agree, they could be Baylor. But they also need to be on in order to beat Kentucky. They've also had this habit of digging a deep hole in match, falling behind and then making a spectacular comeback. I don't think they can pull off any comebacks this weekend against Kentucky & Baylor. That's the secret: Be the Baylor!
|
|
|
Post by houstonbear15 on Dec 11, 2019 0:28:53 GMT -5
These are great points! But if we are going to assume that all teams will be playing at their best, then why state that one team at their best would beat another team at their best. That itself creates more of a hypothetical “if” than if one had just said that they predict team x to win. That’s why I asked how consistently the teams are actually playing at their best. I don’t watch enough of Washington/Kentucky to know that. Have they been leaving more to be desired lately or has their play recently been at their best? Baylor has gotten away without playing their best at times but have really hit a stride since the Texas match. I feel confident that the best Baylor can show up going into the weekend but that can’t be said about every team. It’s really just more of a question about consistency rather than potential. Baylor played great against Texas at home and deserved the win.
But, two matches later, Baylor went to West Virginia and needed 4 sets to earn a hard-fought win over a very bad WVU team: 30-32, 25-23, 25-22, 25-17. Can't say I agree that this is a match you can count as "hitting a stride".
Actually you’re right. I guess that one didn’t really stand out to me because WVU also took a set from Baylor in Waco. Anytime you’re the #1 team, other squads throw their absolute best at you with a little more motivation. Regardless, that’s besides the main point of my post
|
|
|
Post by horns1 on Dec 11, 2019 0:31:21 GMT -5
Baylor played great against Texas at home and deserved the win.
But, two matches later, Baylor went to West Virginia and needed 4 sets to earn a hard-fought win over a very bad WVU team: 30-32, 25-23, 25-22, 25-17. Can't say I agree that this is a match you can count as "hitting a stride".
Actually you’re right. I guess that one didn’t really stand out to me because WVU also took a set from Baylor in Waco. Anytime you’re the #1 team, other squads throw their absolute best at you with a little more motivation. Regardless, that’s besides the main point of my post You don't say . . .
|
|
|
Post by vballvball on Dec 11, 2019 0:36:16 GMT -5
This is a subjective question, but who is the best setter in this regional? KA-POWell um no
|
|
|
Post by houstonbear15 on Dec 11, 2019 0:47:40 GMT -5
That's what I was thinking, but wanted some other opinions.
Well it’s certainly not Lockin. I do love her game and Baylor is where they are partially because of her. She’s a great defensive setter and provides some kills as well but Lilley betters every ball she touches. She’s a very good fundamental setter but her volleyball IQ is amazing. She and Camille Conner are my two of my favorite setters outside of Lockin. I haven’t watched as much of her this season but surely she’s the top of this regional.
|
|
|
Post by midnightblue on Dec 11, 2019 0:55:38 GMT -5
If Washington's serve is ON, I like the Dawgs in this one. If it's not.. could go either way.
|
|
|
Post by midnightblue on Dec 11, 2019 0:57:48 GMT -5
This is a subjective question, but who is the best setter in this regional? Easily Madison Lilley. Lilley collapsed in on herself like a dying star last year in Minneapolis. She should be out for redemption this time around. I agree. She is the best setter in that regional.
|
|
|
Post by saywhatnow on Dec 11, 2019 2:12:21 GMT -5
But that’s all hypothetical. How consistently has Washington/Kentucky actually played at their best? Their average/normal play is really all that matters when discussing a matchup. If playing at their best was so achievable, both teams would have less than 6 losses. I agree and think any of these teams can make it out. But who beats who at their best just doesn’t seem like the best basis for discussing which team it is that will make it. I think in the tournament you should assume that both teams are going to be playing at their best. Plus, a team can play well above their "season average" in the tournament (it's only 6 games). Additionally, if you're discussing a matchup, you're going to look at the recent tape over the "average/normal" tape from throughout the season. I also don't think any coach is going to tell his team (for example) "well, Edmond CAN BE really good, but she's inconsistent, so we're going to prepare for her being average or bad." But I think that's a bit beside the point. I'll speak for Kentucky because I watch much more Kentucky volleyball than Washington volleyball, but Baylor's resume-boosters are from the same time as some as Kentucky's resume-sinkers, when Skinner was trying Edmond on the right, and doing other weird things with the line-up. So it's not as simple as "if they were better, they wouldn't have 6 losses." I'm not saying Kentucky is definitely better than Baylor. I'm not even very confident Kentucky is going to beat a good Washington team. But I do think Kentucky matches up well with Baylor, because Kentucky is a tough serving team (Baylor has had their serve-receive troubles, and Lockin can struggle to get clean touches on OOS balls) AND Kentucky may have two of the best first contacts in the NCAA so they can move the ball around. What Baylor has going for them: VDM on the right (who has been improving) to slow down Stumler and Edmond. I, too, watched a lot of Kentucky this season and the lineup changes with Edmond on the right drove me crazy. They smoothed things out and settled down. I like Kentucky's floor defense with Curry being one of my faves to watch. Lilley, Edmund, Curry and Stumler are formidable.
|
|
|
Post by FTLOG on Dec 11, 2019 2:23:08 GMT -5
This is what I don’t get about Kentucky: they have Lilley and Edmond, and I guess I thought Curry was a top shelf libero, and I feel like people talk about Stumler in a way that makes me think there probably aren’t many better OH2s.... so why aren’t they even better than co-SEC champs and the #9 seed?
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Dec 11, 2019 2:30:19 GMT -5
Lilley collapsed in on herself like a dying star last year in Minneapolis. She should be out for redemption this time around. I agree. She is the best setter in that regional. Last time I saw Lilley she got benched. I may or may not be hoping for a repeat performance. Also, dogs are way better cats. Cat people are kind of psycho.
|
|
|
Post by Sbilo on Dec 11, 2019 5:16:45 GMT -5
Will be interesting to see what a Kentucky team without Edmond looks like next year. I’m not convinced. I say Washington takes this btw But they’re getting a stud OH next year..
|
|
|
Post by Sbilo on Dec 11, 2019 5:18:10 GMT -5
Kentucky has a better supporting cast around Edmond than Bajema with Washington..
This is going to be a 5-setter.
|
|
|
Post by blue-footedbooby on Dec 11, 2019 6:18:45 GMT -5
KA-POWell um no The proof is in the pudding.
|
|
|
Post by donut on Dec 11, 2019 9:06:35 GMT -5
I think in the tournament you should assume that both teams are going to be playing at their best. Plus, a team can play well above their "season average" in the tournament (it's only 6 games). Additionally, if you're discussing a matchup, you're going to look at the recent tape over the "average/normal" tape from throughout the season. I also don't think any coach is going to tell his team (for example) "well, Edmond CAN BE really good, but she's inconsistent, so we're going to prepare for her being average or bad." But I think that's a bit beside the point. I'll speak for Kentucky because I watch much more Kentucky volleyball than Washington volleyball, but Baylor's resume-boosters are from the same time as some as Kentucky's resume-sinkers, when Skinner was trying Edmond on the right, and doing other weird things with the line-up. So it's not as simple as "if they were better, they wouldn't have 6 losses." I'm not saying Kentucky is definitely better than Baylor. I'm not even very confident Kentucky is going to beat a good Washington team. But I do think Kentucky matches up well with Baylor, because Kentucky is a tough serving team (Baylor has had their serve-receive troubles, and Lockin can struggle to get clean touches on OOS balls) AND Kentucky may have two of the best first contacts in the NCAA so they can move the ball around. What Baylor has going for them: VDM on the right (who has been improving) to slow down Stumler and Edmond. These are great points! But if we are going to assume that all teams will be playing at their best, then why state that one team at their best would beat another team at their best. That itself creates more of a hypothetical “if” than if one had just said that they predict team x to win. That’s why I asked how consistently the teams are actually playing at their best. I don’t watch enough of Washington/Kentucky to know that. Have they been leaving more to be desired lately or has their play recently been at their best? Baylor has gotten away without playing their best at times but have really hit a stride since the Texas match. I feel confident that the best Baylor can show up going into the weekend but that can’t be said about every team. It’s really just more of a question about consistency rather than potential. I think you're fishing a bit for an answer you want to hear. All I stated was that Kentucky at their best beats Baylor at their best (I didn't even make a call on who I thought would win the match-up). You essentially responded with "it shouldn't matter who beats who at their 'best'; we should be comparing team's average level of play." What I tried to say in response to that (maybe I wasn't clear) is that I think if we are going to assume one way or the other, we should assume that teams are going to play at their best during the tournament. I don't know if that's true, but my guts tells me the level of play should be higher in December. I definitely don't agree that consistency beats potential in a single-elimination tournament. Peaks and troughs matter when one game is on the line. Similarly, match-ups matter (see: Oregon and Minnesota from last year). A team can be better AND more consistent than another team, and still lose because they match-up poorly against them.
|
|
|
Post by horns1 on Dec 11, 2019 9:08:52 GMT -5
The proof is in the pudding. I could eat some pudding . . .
|
|