|
Post by cbrown1709 on Apr 4, 2007 15:30:18 GMT -5
How do you guys think Merriweather would do internationally?
|
|
|
Post by bunnywailer on Apr 4, 2007 16:01:23 GMT -5
Merriweather would have to switch positions. You need a bigger blocking presence internationally at the MB position. Great attacker. Blocking not quite as good as hitting.
|
|
|
Post by brybry2 on Apr 4, 2007 16:06:57 GMT -5
I disagree that the US does not have anyone decent outside of Scott and Bown. I think Bachman and Joines are decent. They're not great, but the US doesn't run the type of system where they'll get much more than 10 or 15 pts out of their middles. Foluke could be a good replacement albeit a green one. But I'd love to see Merriweather in there.
|
|
|
Post by brybry2 on Apr 4, 2007 16:07:42 GMT -5
Merriweather would have to switch positions. You need a bigger blocking presence internationally at the MB position. Great attacker. Blocking not quite as good as hitting. Didn't she lead the nation in BPG last season?
|
|
|
Post by bunnywailer on Apr 4, 2007 16:08:30 GMT -5
Huh? Kim Oden was the LEAST physical, and the most finesse, of the volleyball Odens. "Packing on meat" and Kim Oden do not go together in the same sentence. Last time I checked, Team USA doesn't have any decent middles outside Bown and Scott. That was my original point. Have you ever noticed that we tend to go in a circle here? Ay!!! Dios mios!!! You nutjob. Learn the English language, specifically the syntax and use of the comparative analogy. Your original statement: "Foluke needs to pack on some meat and I think she could be a Kim Oden type player." The use of this statement compares Player A to Player B, if the Condition X is met. Player A needs to meet Condition X in order to compare favorably to Player B. Player B is ASSUMED to already have Condition X present. So (stay with me here you are already getting lost...): Player A = Foluke Player B = Kim Oden Condition X = Pack on meat Anyone who knows or has seen Kim Oden in her playing career definitely will attest to the fact that Condition X (packing on meat) was never present. So why would Foluke have to "pack on meat" when Kim Oden never had a "pack on meat" game in the first place? If you had said: "Foluke needs to pack on some meat and I think she could be an ELAINA Oden type player" OR, just left out the "pack on meat" clause entirely and said: "Foluke could eventually be a Kim Oden type player, I think" Where you compared the two of them WITHOUT prefacing it with the "pack on some meat" condition, then that would have been fine also. Where you lost the comparison is comparing Foluke to Kim Oden using the condition of "pack on some meat" when that condition is completely unrelated to the comparison.
|
|
|
Post by bunnywailer on Apr 4, 2007 16:13:30 GMT -5
Merriweather would have to switch positions. You need a bigger blocking presence internationally at the MB position. Great attacker. Blocking not quite as good as hitting. Didn't she lead the nation in BPG last season? Woops. Damn. I got Meriwether mixed up with that other UCLA kid that everyone thought was a terrific National Team prospect. She graduated like 3-4 years ago. Meriwether might actually be a good blocker. She would have had to have been a once-every-ten-years-type blocker at the NCAA level to make an impact at the next level. At 6-1, she would be giving up alot of inches at the net internationally.
|
|
|
Post by VolleyTX on Apr 4, 2007 16:15:27 GMT -5
Are you kidding me? No one blocked like Merriweather this past year in the NCAAs.... averaging about 2 blocks per game. She may not have the international experience, but what American girl does at her age. When blocking, she gets up and over the net about as high as anyone I've ever seen. I don't get yoru "blocking presence" comment at all.
If anything, there is a trend in Women's international volleyball to use "smaller" but quicker players in the middle.
|
|
|
Post by brybry2 on Apr 4, 2007 16:22:08 GMT -5
Didn't she lead the nation in BPG last season? Woops. Damn. I got Meriwether mixed up with that other UCLA kid that everyone thought was a terrific National Team prospect. She graduated like 3-4 years ago. Meriwether might actually be a good blocker. She would have had to have been a once-every-ten-years-type blocker at the NCAA level to make an impact at the next level. At 6-1, she would be giving up alot of inches at the net internationally. Are you thinking of Kristee Porter? I think there's actually quite a few MBs at the international level that are around 6'1. As sIsam and Murina point out, NCAA women are unusually tall. I think Merriweather would be a great candidate because along w/ her amazing hops, she has great speed. She can close the block rather quickly. Ideally, we would put Merriweather at M2 because she hits quick sets so well. And we'd put Bown at M1 as her slide is her most effective hit. Of course this is all moot if Merriweather has no interest in the NT and just wants to play in PR.
|
|
|
Post by Phaedrus on Apr 4, 2007 17:05:01 GMT -5
That was my original point. Have you ever noticed that we tend to go in a circle here? Ay!!! Dios mios!!! You nutjob. Learn the English language, specifically the syntax and use of the comparative analogy. Your original statement: "Foluke needs to pack on some meat and I think she could be a Kim Oden type player." The use of this statement compares Player A to Player B, if the Condition X is met. Player A needs to meet Condition X in order to compare favorably to Player B. Player B is ASSUMED to already have Condition X present. So (stay with me here you are already getting lost...): Player A = Foluke Player B = Kim Oden Condition X = Pack on meat Anyone who knows or has seen Kim Oden in her playing career definitely will attest to the fact that Condition X (packing on meat) was never present. So why would Foluke have to "pack on meat" when Kim Oden never had a "pack on meat" game in the first place? If you had said: "Foluke needs to pack on some meat and I think she could be an ELAINA Oden type player" OR, just left out the "pack on meat" clause entirely and said: "Foluke could eventually be a Kim Oden type player, I think" Where you compared the two of them WITHOUT prefacing it with the "pack on some meat" condition, then that would have been fine also. Where you lost the comparison is comparing Foluke to Kim Oden using the condition of "pack on some meat" when that condition is completely unrelated to the comparison. Perhaps it is asking too much for me to expect people to trace the logic back to the original posting. Or perhaps 38 Skynard is much too busy regaling himself with the sweet sounds of his own typing to notice. That wasn't the quote I was referring to. I never made that quote. I was referring to the fact that USA can not produce a middle who can beat out Danielle Scott. So before you bust on someone next time, please read the reference material and try to filter your vacuous and inane comments through what ever grey matter you have before you insult the wrong person.
|
|
|
Post by OverAndUnder on Apr 4, 2007 17:35:38 GMT -5
You nutjob. Learn the English language, specifically the syntax and use of the comparative analogy. Your original statement: "Foluke needs to pack on some meat and I think she could be a Kim Oden type player." The use of this statement compares Player A to Player B, if the Condition X is met. Player A needs to meet Condition X in order to compare favorably to Player B. Player B is ASSUMED to already have Condition X present. So (stay with me here you are already getting lost...): Player A = Foluke Player B = Kim Oden Condition X = Pack on meat Anyone who knows or has seen Kim Oden in her playing career definitely will attest to the fact that Condition X (packing on meat) was never present. So why would Foluke have to "pack on meat" when Kim Oden never had a "pack on meat" game in the first place? If you had said: "Foluke needs to pack on some meat and I think she could be an ELAINA Oden type player" OR, just left out the "pack on meat" clause entirely and said: "Foluke could eventually be a Kim Oden type player, I think" Where you compared the two of them WITHOUT prefacing it with the "pack on some meat" condition, then that would have been fine also. Where you lost the comparison is comparing Foluke to Kim Oden using the condition of "pack on some meat" when that condition is completely unrelated to the comparison. Perhaps it is asking too much for me to expect people to trace the logic back to the original posting. Or perhaps 38 Skynard is much too busy regaling himself with the sweet sounds of his own typing to notice. That wasn't the quote I was referring to. I never made that quote. I was referring to the fact that USA can not produce a middle who can beat out Danielle Scott. So before you bust on someone next time, please read the reference material and try to filter your vacuous and inane comments through what ever grey matter you have before you insult the wrong person. Where's an "ooh, snap!" smiley face when you need one? Maybe Odin is afraid that Sexy would use it so often it would crash the software to serve out the gif over and over.
|
|
|
Post by USAFAN on Apr 4, 2007 18:39:54 GMT -5
Heather Bown has blossomed into quite a dominant middle and is enjoying a successful performing season in Europe, there haven't been too many MB's recently who are great hitters and blockers. Usually they are more dominant at one than the other. Foluke needs to pack on some meat and I think she could be a Kim Oden type player. Huh? Kim Oden was the LEAST physical, and the most finesse, of the volleyball Odens. "Packing on meat" and Kim Oden do not go together in the same sentence. Last time I checked, Team USA doesn't have any decent middles outside Bown and Scott. I should've elaborated, but I meant it would be in Foluke's best interest to gain a little more meat, of course that wouldn't make her look like Kim Oden because she is very thin, but Oden was very effective and Foluke could be the same.
|
|
|
Post by bunnywailer on Apr 4, 2007 22:29:13 GMT -5
You nutjob. Learn the English language, specifically the syntax and use of the comparative analogy. Your original statement: "Foluke needs to pack on some meat and I think she could be a Kim Oden type player." The use of this statement compares Player A to Player B, if the Condition X is met. Player A needs to meet Condition X in order to compare favorably to Player B. Player B is ASSUMED to already have Condition X present. So (stay with me here you are already getting lost...): Player A = Foluke Player B = Kim Oden Condition X = Pack on meat Anyone who knows or has seen Kim Oden in her playing career definitely will attest to the fact that Condition X (packing on meat) was never present. So why would Foluke have to "pack on meat" when Kim Oden never had a "pack on meat" game in the first place? If you had said: "Foluke needs to pack on some meat and I think she could be an ELAINA Oden type player" OR, just left out the "pack on meat" clause entirely and said: "Foluke could eventually be a Kim Oden type player, I think" Where you compared the two of them WITHOUT prefacing it with the "pack on some meat" condition, then that would have been fine also. Where you lost the comparison is comparing Foluke to Kim Oden using the condition of "pack on some meat" when that condition is completely unrelated to the comparison. Perhaps it is asking too much for me to expect people to trace the logic back to the original posting. Or perhaps 38 Skynard is much too busy regaling himself with the sweet sounds of his own typing to notice. That wasn't the quote I was referring to. I never made that quote. I was referring to the fact that USA can not produce a middle who can beat out Danielle Scott. So before you bust on someone next time, please read the reference material and try to filter your vacuous and inane comments through what ever grey matter you have before you insult the wrong person. Sorry, I got you mixed up with the other nutjob. If it's worth anything, you're much more attractive than that doofus.
|
|
|
Post by bunnywailer on Apr 4, 2007 22:35:52 GMT -5
Woops. Damn. I got Meriwether mixed up with that other UCLA kid that everyone thought was a terrific National Team prospect. She graduated like 3-4 years ago. Meriwether might actually be a good blocker. She would have had to have been a once-every-ten-years-type blocker at the NCAA level to make an impact at the next level. At 6-1, she would be giving up alot of inches at the net internationally. Are you thinking of Kristee Porter? I think there's actually quite a few MBs at the international level that are around 6'1. As sIsam and Murina point out, NCAA women are unusually tall. I think Merriweather would be a great candidate because along w/ her amazing hops, she has great speed. She can close the block rather quickly. Ideally, we would put Merriweather at M2 because she hits quick sets so well. And we'd put Bown at M1 as her slide is her most effective hit. Of course this is all moot if Merriweather has no interest in the NT and just wants to play in PR. I don't think Merriweather would have a problem blocking internationally against 80% of the competition. But the remaining 20% (like, for instance, Russia) poses problems. China proves you can be successful internationally with shorter, yet exceptionally quick, athletes. However, you have to play some incredible defense behind the block, convert alot in transition of touch/control blocking, and have a serve-receive offense that converts for a very, very high percentage. Team USA women is definitely not in the Chinese style of play. Yet, they aren't quite in the towering, physical style of Russia either. They are somewhere in the middle. Plus, it's not necessarily a "how high can she touch" or "how far over can she get at max jump" issue. Taller players always have and always will have a better time-to-height ratio. Shorter players can be effective on the block, but they have to be just about perfect with their footwork/jump/hand position to block as well as a taller player. Plus, shorter players get tired over the course of a longer match, but taller players never get shorter.
|
|
|
Post by Murina on Apr 5, 2007 0:04:37 GMT -5
I'd love to see Merriweather give Europe and the NT a try. There are still a handfull of top middles who are around 6'1". Merriweather seems like the type of athlete who just might pull off being a very good small middle.
Everyone is about to have a lot of trouble matching Russia in the size department. If the USA tries to match Russia's size in the near future, Russia's volleyball skills are going to blow USA away anyway. Russia has really cornered the market on giant mobile skilled female volleyball players. I think China is the only country who will be able to come close - but probably not until 2012.
|
|
|
Post by bunnywailer on Apr 5, 2007 0:11:08 GMT -5
You know, all this discussion about the women's game internationally made me go review the 2004 Athens gold medal match.
The thing about Gamova that is, to me, most impressive, isn't her hitting. That's a given. It's her blocking that impresses me the most. For her size, she is amazing quick laterally, and her hand position and her ability to read hitters is superior.
And how about the amazing Chinese offense? They actually ran a pogo-stick pump-2 in that match! And it completely faked out the Russian middle (don't know her name, she's a good-looking brunette that had eye shadow on for the Gold Medal match...lol).
|
|