|
|
Post by jsn112 on Aug 22, 2016 16:15:59 GMT -5
Why are we lumping these servers together, speed-wise? It should be effective-wise. Hancock is a left-hander, which is not the same as the right-hander. Effectively, both will have different results because a left-hander like Hancock is not widely. So the best serve should be based on result, not speed. Even as a defender of Hancock, I never thought that she had the fastest swing. But all she is is the best in the last 10-20 years in women's volleyball when it comes to results. Even the great server like Bricio can't touch her. Isn't Boskovic also left-handed? So the comparison makes sense. Boskovic has virtually the same "effectiveness" and likely a lot more speed Would love to see her serving stats if you have it. If her result is better than Micha's, then Tijana Bošković would be considered better, not because of her speed, although that helps too I am sure. But this is all about results. I asked similar question a couple of years ago about Micha vs. Mackenzie Dagostino from Florida because both serve left-handed. But Mackenzie Dagostino didn't have the same result. |
|
|
|
Post by BuckysHeat on Aug 22, 2016 17:05:23 GMT -5
Isn't Boskovic also left-handed? So the comparison makes sense. Boskovic has virtually the same "effectiveness" and likely a lot more speed Would love to see her serving stats if you have it. If her result is better than Micha's, then Tijana Bošković would be considered better, not because of her speed, although that helps too I am sure. But this is all about results. I asked similar question a couple of years ago about Micha vs. Mackenzie Dagostino from Florida because both serve left-handed. But Mackenzie Dagostino didn't have the same result. Boskovich serving: 65 serves 21 errors 10 aces |
|
|
|
Post by Disc808 on Aug 22, 2016 17:13:28 GMT -5
Isn't Boskovic also left-handed? So the comparison makes sense. Boskovic has virtually the same "effectiveness" and likely a lot more speed Would love to see her serving stats if you have it. If her result is better than Micha's, then Tijana Bošković would be considered better, not because of her speed, although that helps too I am sure. But this is all about results. I asked similar question a couple of years ago about Micha vs. Mackenzie Dagostino from Florida because both serve left-handed. But Mackenzie Dagostino didn't have the same result. According to the Olympic stats, Milena Rasic was the best server statistically at the Olympics, using a jump float serve (correct me if I'm wrong). She had 0.57 aces per set. The next best server was Boskovic with 0.33 aces per set...There were jump float servers with virtually the same amount of aces per set as Boskovic. Considering Boskovic is a lefty and uses a jump serve that has been clocked as one of the fastest, what makes Micha Hancock's serve better? Boskovic had about a 1 Ace: 2 Error ratio on 65 service attempts. What was Micha Hancock's ace to error ratio? Keep in mind that Boskovic is serving against some of the best players in the world and Hancock isn't. And also keep in mind that stats don't really tell how many of Boskovic's serves put the other team out of system and this is only one event. Micha Hancock could very well be an asset. But, depending on the situation, another hitter or another setter who has an effective jump floater can be more valuable to the team, if Hancock will be just used as a serving sub like Courtney Thompson. |
|
|
|
Post by rogero1 on Aug 22, 2016 17:33:04 GMT -5
On the men's side, you expect 75% success. Excuses are tossed out that anything less than an aggressive hard hit jump serve with movement will be rammed right back down your throat. However, I saw several matches that had runs from a simple serve, USA vs Italy in the 3rd set saw Holt go on a long streak. You need to mix up serves to keep the opponent guessing and adjusting but you do not have to have a huge mistake prone jump serve to be the only effective server. Hancock only serves 80% but aces 10-15% (not counting the lower level competition in the Domican repub) of her serves and keeps the team out of system a similar percentage of the time. The US team as a whole served in the range of 82% during the olympics. That 82% did not result in many aces or out of system contacts. It seems to be time to let servers serve how they are comfortable and familiar and to teach the middles how to actually serve. Too bad Bricio isn't american USA women were getting their serve in 90% of the time before the Olympics. Up until the Serbia semi, they were only serving at about 85%. Do you use up a spot for an 82% serving specialist? Until she gets into Anaheim and can show that she can be effective against the "A" team passers, only time will tell. |
|
|
|
Post by cardinalvolleyball on Aug 22, 2016 22:45:09 GMT -5
Isn't Boskovic also left-handed? So the comparison makes sense. Boskovic has virtually the same "effectiveness" and likely a lot more speed Would love to see her serving stats if you have it. If her result is better than Micha's, then Tijana Bošković would be considered better, not because of her speed, although that helps too I am sure. But this is all about results. I asked similar question a couple of years ago about Micha vs. Mackenzie Dagostino from Florida because both serve left-handed. But Mackenzie Dagostino didn't have the same result. I have Micha Hancock's serving stats for top International competition on US team. 0 Aces 0 Errors |
|
|
|
Post by Hawk Attack on Aug 23, 2016 0:21:42 GMT -5
It seems to me like the solution is simple, give Hancock her shot against top level competition. I don't see why at this point, at the beginning of a new quad, she hasn't earned that chance.
|
|
|
|
Post by Disc808 on Aug 23, 2016 1:10:13 GMT -5
There's a reason why Karch hasn't given Hancock a chance to serve against top competition. Perhaps he thought Hancock needed to develop her setting skills and overall play. Who knows, she may be given a chance prior to Tokyo. I think she is a great player. Nonetheless, USA servers don't have to be ace machines, they just have to put the ball in play and try to get the other team out of system. Against the teams in the Pan Am cup in the Dominican Republic, sure it made sense to have Hancock because of the competition. Against Olympians and other top level competition, it may make more sense to have another OH, Opp, etc. Hancock will have to improve her setting skills
|
|
|
|
Post by rogero1 on Aug 23, 2016 1:24:58 GMT -5
And yet Carlini's setting got pulled in favor of Hancock's serving at PAG. I'm guessing that those coaches thought that Hancock's setting was good enough to add her serving to the lineup.
|
|
|
|
Post by Disc808 on Aug 23, 2016 1:39:45 GMT -5
And yet Carlini's setting got pulled in favor of Hancock's serving at PAG. I'm guessing that those coaches thought that Hancock's setting was good enough to add her serving to the lineup. Yes Carlini got pulled. Probably because she was not connecting well with the hitters. If Carlini had connected better the outcome may have been different, she probably was nervous. In time though, Carlini may prove to be the better setter. And when Hancock serves against better/more experienced passers, who knows how effective she will be. Boskovic didn't have a mind-boggling number of aces per set |
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Aug 23, 2016 9:08:02 GMT -5
And yet Carlini's setting got pulled in favor of Hancock's serving at PAG. I'm guessing that those coaches thought that Hancock's setting was good enough to add her serving to the lineup. In the one match against a team that can be realistically considered international-level competition, Hancock's serving did nothing (was in fact a detriment), and they ended up going back to Carlini. |
|
|
|
Post by jsn112 on Aug 23, 2016 11:31:16 GMT -5
And yet Carlini's setting got pulled in favor of Hancock's serving at PAG. I'm guessing that those coaches thought that Hancock's setting was good enough to add her serving to the lineup. In the one match against a team that can be realistically considered international-level competition, Hancock's serving did nothing (was in fact a detriment), and they ended up going back to Carlini. Did Carlini save the day and then subsequently become the starter the next match? |
|
|
|
Post by jsn112 on Aug 23, 2016 11:43:35 GMT -5
Would love to see her serving stats if you have it. If her result is better than Micha's, then Tijana Bošković would be considered better, not because of her speed, although that helps too I am sure. But this is all about results. I asked similar question a couple of years ago about Micha vs. Mackenzie Dagostino from Florida because both serve left-handed. But Mackenzie Dagostino didn't have the same result. According to the Olympic stats, Milena Rasic was the best server statistically at the Olympics, using a jump float serve (correct me if I'm wrong). She had 0.57 aces per set. The next best server was Boskovic with 0.33 aces per set...There were jump float servers with virtually the same amount of aces per set as Boskovic. Considering Boskovic is a lefty and uses a jump serve that has been clocked as one of the fastest, what makes Micha Hancock's serve better? Boskovic had about a 1 Ace: 2 Error ratio on 65 service attempts. What was Micha Hancock's ace to error ratio? Keep in mind that Boskovic is serving against some of the best players in the world and Hancock isn't. And also keep in mind that stats don't really tell how many of Boskovic's serves put the other team out of system and this is only one event. Micha Hancock could very well be an asset. But, depending on the situation, another hitter or another setter who has an effective jump floater can be more valuable to the team, if Hancock will be just used as a serving sub like Courtney Thompson. The same reason Milena Rasic's jump floaters were better than other servers' jump floaters. |
|
