|
Post by hammer on Dec 20, 2023 12:18:11 GMT -5
what year is she? Grad transfer? She any good? I assume she's transferring because she wants to start and cracking the Nebraska lineup looks daunting. Looking at her videos, my first take is that Blyashov is better as an attacker. Not sure about her all around game. Anyway, likely she would have to beat out Blyashov (or Rubin, which seems highly unlikely).
|
|
|
Post by crando on Dec 20, 2023 15:55:10 GMT -5
I've never seen her play, but based on her experiences, I have to think Ipar Kurt is going to be in the mix next year too, with Harvey and Blyashov. And I have to think Rubin's spot is secure, unless she gets worse or something -- she had a great season. Haven't seen Jurevicius play either, but based on HS career and recruiting rankings, she'd probably be in the mix too -- but I agree that another pin is low on the priority list.
I think Bob Hillman transferred into Stanford as a sophomore to play on the men's team a long time ago. FWIW.
On the whole Vicini thing, I gotta side with Bigjohn. If hitter A scores more points for you and fewer for the opponent than hitter B does, I'd set hitter A a little more often. This year, Vicini was .411, Tufuga .400, Francis .368, Miner .329, and Kipp .320. Vicini had 157 kills on 316 swings, so (aside from Tufuga at 8 for 15) that made her the most terminal hitter, based on kills per swing, too.
If I were a baseball manager, I'd try to get my guy hitting .411 more at bats, at the expense of the guys hitting .320, .290 and .283. If I were a basketball coach, I'd try to get my guy shooting 41.1% a few more shots, at the expense of my guys shooting 32%, 29% and 28.3%. I don't understand why someone would think that scoring more points would a bad idea. And she hit .427 last year (better than all but Miner, who was .461 last year, before becoming much less efficient this year), so it's not like anyone shouldn't have seen this season coming for Vicini.
Granted, if they set her a little more, defenses would pay a little more attention to her, and her efficiency would slowly go down with more sets. But if you set Vicini 50 more balls and her efficiency dropped from .411 to .380, and then the pins got 50 fewer sets, but those folks getting most of the swings saw their efficiency creep up a little bit (since Vicini was getting more defensive attention), it seems like simple math tells you that you'd be ahead of the game.
|
|
|
Post by Sbilo on Dec 20, 2023 17:13:12 GMT -5
On Caroline Jurevicius - I honestly don’t think the team needs another pin.
We are set for at least 3 years with Blyashov, Harvey and Ipar Kurt. Based from the videos I have seen of Jurevicius, I don’t think she is going to beat those 3 for a starting role. That’s just my take.
|
|
|
Post by Sbilo on Dec 20, 2023 17:23:39 GMT -5
Now the biggest question is - Taylor Harvey.
She is probably waiting for Stanford admissions and the promise of playing with her older sister.
But the back-to-back champions from Texas must be putting more pressure on her to commit now.
I hope we win this time.
|
|
|
Post by liberosetter101 on Dec 20, 2023 17:54:10 GMT -5
Now the biggest question is - Taylor Harvey. She is probably waiting for Stanford admissions and the promise of playing with her older sister. But the back-to-back champions from Texas must be putting more pressure on her to commit now. I hope we win this time. They have 3 really good middles competing for playing time. I could be wrong, but I see her going to Nebraska more than Texas. Unless one of the Texas middles hit the portal. Ames is a lock to start Not sure if Singletary > Harvey ? Same with Bunton but I know she was a top 10 recruit
|
|
|
Post by beachbomb on Dec 20, 2023 17:54:43 GMT -5
Now the biggest question is - Taylor Harvey. She is probably waiting for Stanford admissions and the promise of playing with her older sister. But the back-to-back champions from Texas must be putting more pressure on her to commit now. I hope we win this time. but they keep getting recruits and transfers that seem to be filling the middle ... so do you commit to a back to back national champion and maybe don't play. or commit somewhere you probably are going to start day one and still be at a dominant program (top 5) and get a second to not alot education. I'm praying she's a cardinal <3
|
|
|
Post by austinhorn21 on Dec 20, 2023 18:03:35 GMT -5
Now the biggest question is - Taylor Harvey. She is probably waiting for Stanford admissions and the promise of playing with her older sister. But the back-to-back champions from Texas must be putting more pressure on her to commit now. I hope we win this time. could be wrong here but I think Texas wins this one too. If she does choose Stanford though what an amazing opportunity for her.
|
|
|
Post by thebaytocsulb on Dec 20, 2023 18:36:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by liberosetter101 on Dec 20, 2023 18:49:09 GMT -5
Now the biggest question is - Taylor Harvey. She is probably waiting for Stanford admissions and the promise of playing with her older sister. But the back-to-back champions from Texas must be putting more pressure on her to commit now. I hope we win this time. but they keep getting recruits and transfers that seem to be filling the middle ... so do you commit to a back to back national champion and maybe don't play. or commit somewhere you probably are going to start day one and still be at a dominant program (top 5) and get a second to not alot education. I'm praying she's a cardinal <3 + play with your sister!
|
|
|
Post by bigjohn043 on Dec 20, 2023 19:00:27 GMT -5
Now the biggest question is - Taylor Harvey. She is probably waiting for Stanford admissions and the promise of playing with her older sister. But the back-to-back champions from Texas must be putting more pressure on her to commit now. I hope we win this time. They have 3 really good middles competing for playing time. I could be wrong, but I see her going to Nebraska more than Texas. Unless one of the Texas middles hit the portal. Ames is a lock to start Not sure if Singletary > Harvey ? Same with Bunton but I know she was a top 10 recruit FWIW, I think Harvey starts day 1 anywhere she goes. I think she is that good.
|
|
|
Post by Cruz'n on Dec 20, 2023 19:44:15 GMT -5
in a good or bad way? i think it's a first that i've seen so much speculation of a student-athlete in the portal having their sights set on stanford (M Gates aside) - granted i haven't caught up with volleyball in a hot minute. She's very good but we don't need any more pins, we need DS's and MB's. Harvery and Blyshov are going to be on the pins next year It's very confusing when you use "we" to refer to Stanford; because in most of your posts, you use "we" to refer to Wisconsin.
|
|
|
Post by bobbk on Dec 20, 2023 20:50:43 GMT -5
Plus a really rare JC transfer for MVB who is in or recently was in a Stanford Grad school
|
|
|
Post by stanfordvb on Dec 20, 2023 20:56:17 GMT -5
what year is she? Grad transfer? She any good? I assume she's transferring because she wants to start and cracking the Nebraska lineup looks daunting. Looking at her videos, my first take is that Blyashov is better as an attacker. Not sure about her all around game. Anyway, likely she would have to beat out Blyashov (or Rubin, which seems highly unlikely). cj is an oppo, she would compete with Harvey for that spot if she ended up at stanford, not against rubin and Julia for OH.
|
|
|
Post by acea on Dec 20, 2023 22:07:39 GMT -5
There’s like negative chance that CJ can transfer in this early in her academic career unless she had a very accelerated first semester (I did see somewhere she was double majoring?), even then unlikely when she’s against a pool of people who’ve had 2+ years at a CC or other institution. If we’re talking transfer MBs, I wish we could get Leyla Blackwell I feel like she would thrive under Miner like she did with Blossom
|
|
|
Post by saywho on Dec 21, 2023 8:06:31 GMT -5
I've never seen her play, but based on her experiences, I have to think Ipar Kurt is going to be in the mix next year too, with Harvey and Blyashov. And I have to think Rubin's spot is secure, unless she gets worse or something -- she had a great season. Haven't seen Jurevicius play either, but based on HS career and recruiting rankings, she'd probably be in the mix too -- but I agree that another pin is low on the priority list. I think Bob Hillman transferred into Stanford as a sophomore to play on the men's team a long time ago. FWIW. On the whole Vicini thing, I gotta side with Bigjohn. If hitter A scores more points for you and fewer for the opponent than hitter B does, I'd set hitter A a little more often. This year, Vicini was .411, Tufuga .400, Francis .368, Miner .329, and Kipp .320. Vicini had 157 kills on 316 swings, so (aside from Tufuga at 8 for 15) that made her the most terminal hitter, based on kills per swing, too. If I were a baseball manager, I'd try to get my guy hitting .411 more at bats, at the expense of the guys hitting .320, .290 and .283. If I were a basketball coach, I'd try to get my guy shooting 41.1% a few more shots, at the expense of my guys shooting 32%, 29% and 28.3%. I don't understand why someone would think that scoring more points would a bad idea. And she hit .427 last year (better than all but Miner, who was .461 last year, before becoming much less efficient this year), so it's not like anyone shouldn't have seen this season coming for Vicini. Granted, if they set her a little more, defenses would pay a little more attention to her, and her efficiency would slowly go down with more sets. But if you set Vicini 50 more balls and her efficiency dropped from .411 to .380, and then the pins got 50 fewer sets, but those folks getting most of the swings saw their efficiency creep up a little bit (since Vicini was getting more defensive attention), it seems like simple math tells you that you'd be ahead of the game. Bingo! Re: Vicini I also agree that Ipar could come into play next year. She’s been playing against a much higher level of competition for years. To think she is not in the mix is just … dumb. I’d not be surprised if it’s her and Rubin. Her family is very academic-focused and redshirting was a decision to be able to have a 5th year of education at Stanford; not a decision because she needed a year to develop to be on a level playing field with the other girls. At this point, she has already played at a higher level than every other player on the Stanford team. How she will develop or fit in with the team moving forward is unknown, but to think she isn’t at least at the same level as Blyashov and could be the other starting pin next year is just silly. In regards to Caroline Jurevicius, she is an opposite and always has been. She could easily fill Kipp’s spot. She is good; and she has potential to be very good. No idea whether Stanford is actually in the mix but she would certainly be an asset. Of course, a middle blocker would be amazing, but I doubt one will be coming through the portal.
|
|