|
|
Post by stanfordvb on Dec 11, 2018 13:22:38 GMT -5
It seems a bit early to me to start a 2019 thread, but, sadly here it is. The big question mark is how to replace Seliger-Swenson. I think I may be in the minority in my thinking that Nielsen can handle it. The other big question mark is transfers. With so many talented players, someone won't play - so would we see a transfer. If we do, that would make room for a transfer coming in. The third question I have is these two tall middles coming in; I wonder if one of them will move to the outside or if one might redshirt. They don’t need one to hit the left. Hart and Rollins have it locked in for next season. The lineup will look the exact same with a different setter. Kylie Miller is leaving UCLA and could be a possible option. She’s at least better than the backup from this season. If they want to contend for a championship next year they will need a transfer setter. Maybe a setter choosing to do a graduate transfer year. |
|
|
|
Post by chisovnik on Dec 11, 2018 15:49:48 GMT -5
Martin should move to the middle.
|
|
|
|
Post by vbcoltrane on Dec 11, 2018 16:52:03 GMT -5
I'd think Minnesota could be good, even very good, with everybody back and a decent setter. Of course without SSS there will be a dropoff, but I don't think it has to be as drastic as some might think.
|
|
|
|
Post by stanfordvb on Dec 11, 2018 17:15:46 GMT -5
Martin should move to the middle. For who? She’s not gonna beat out Morgan or Pittman. Martin was a good recruit who couldn’t live up to her high school status. |
|
|
|
Post by zero-rotation outside hitter on Dec 11, 2018 17:50:55 GMT -5
I'd think Minnesota could be good, even very good, with everybody back and a decent setter. Of course without SSS there will be a dropoff, but I don't think it has to be as drastic as some might think. Sam is a fantastic setter but wasn't perfect at defense. With an above average, athletic setter capable of dishing in a system Hugh likes, plus another year of experience among the five hitters...could be a VERY good team. |
|
|
|
Post by gogophers on Dec 11, 2018 18:26:40 GMT -5
I don't have the stats to show it, but I believe SSS was, far and away, the Gophers' most effective server. Really, the only particularly effective server. We all know how difficult it will be to replace her running of the offense, and I also think her leadership will be sorely missed. But I hope someone on the team can improve her serving to make up for the loss there, too. Most other teams have serving specialists (though, from what I can see, they're mostly not all that special). But Hugh eschews their use, for some reason.
|
|
|
|
Post by zero-rotation outside hitter on Dec 11, 2018 18:48:04 GMT -5
I don't have the stats to show it, but I believe SSS was, far and away, the Gophers' most effective server. Really, the only particularly effective server. We all know how difficult it will be to replace her running of the offense, and I also think her leadership will be sorely missed. But I hope someone on the team can improve her serving to make up for the loss there, too. Most other teams have serving specialists (though, from what I can see, they're mostly not all that special). But Hugh eschews their use, for some reason. Good point. Prior to the OR match, I thought Barnes was pretty effective as well, and CC could give team fits at times as well. I was always perplexed when they'd go on runs on Samedy's serve or when she'd get aces...it seemed like such a lollipop, but she's made gains. Seeing her serve in warm-up she'd put so much zip on it and it went in! Generally you have to expect that teams are going to side out regularly if they can pass the ball to their setter. Minnesota would give themselves so many more chances if they could get great teams out of system more consistently with tough serving. Serve receive probably even more so, ugh. |
|
|
|
Post by B1Gminnesotafan on Dec 11, 2018 19:57:53 GMT -5
Of course there is more to serving than just aces. But after looking at the stats, it is clear that SSS was the best. Barnes is also very good. Also, I can see a case for a serving specialist. If a player wanted more time on the court, a wicked serve would get them there.
Sam Seleger -Swenson 38 Lauren Barnes 31 CC McGraw 23 Stephany Samedy 21 Adanna Rollins 15
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 11, 2018 20:19:05 GMT -5
Much more to serving than aces, but I have no doubt the Gophers scored more points in Sam's rotation than they did in any other. I would bet Pittman's was their worst, which is not all on her, of course -- just as Sam doesn't get credit for all those points. But she consistently took other teams out of system.
Toward the end of the season, it seemed Steph's rotation was scoring well, although not against Oregon. Barnes was also effective. Not sure about CC or Rollins. My guess is that, in this case, aces were a pretty good ranking.
Also, when you take aces to errors:
Sam 38-21
Barnes 31-24
Samedy 21-18
CC 23-24
Rollins 15-24
Pittman 8-28
|
|
|
|
Post by ilikecorn on Dec 11, 2018 20:50:29 GMT -5
For another take, all of Nebraska's main servers have 40 something service errors. To me it always seemed like Minnesota wanted to serve tough, but not at the expense of making 10 service errors a match. I'd like to see more aggressive serving by the Gophers next year! All of 4 of Stanford's main servers have 50+ service errors, Plummer has 69. Though to me, they serve a few too many... Cruz'n can probably attest to that. But the point still stands. |
|
|
|
Post by airinga on Dec 11, 2018 21:02:35 GMT -5
I also believe there is a stud JUCO OH that won the National title that is supposed to be coming your way. I can't remember her name but she is a 6'1 Japanese player. Airi Miyabe |
|
|
|
Post by Cruz'n on Dec 11, 2018 21:04:28 GMT -5
For another take, all of Nebraska's main servers have 40 something service errors. To me it always seemed like Minnesota wanted to serve tough, but not at the expense of making 10 service errors a match. I'd like to see more aggressive serving by the Gophers next year! All of 4 of Stanford's main servers have 50+ service errors, Plummer has 69. Though to me, they serve a few too many... Cruz'n can probably attest to that. But the point still stands. For past two years, especially this year, many Stanford fans (and other posters on Stanford page) complain about the high number of service errors we have. I am one of those who has no problem with the high number of SE's. Hambly has stated in chalk talks that he is fine with it too. As long as they are serving aggressively, SE's are acceptable. There are situations where I would prefer a high percentage serve, like when down set point, or trailing when other team has 23. But I would rather have a SE with a tough serve, than a lollypop that is in. Why help the other team get into a rhythm with in-system plays? Do you want opponent to get a point from an in-system crush, or from your own SE? I gladly take the SE. |
|
|
|
Post by JHAM on Dec 11, 2018 21:04:55 GMT -5
Serving effectively is getting the opposing team out of system so you basically get a free ball to execute your offense, not so much about getting aces. I know Hugh isn't a fan of the jump serve but everyone serving the same jump float doesn't work against the top teams in the country unless you can effectively change speed, location, serve long and short, etc. Too many times it just looks like certain servers just serve without any strategic intent for instance serving right to an elite passing libero. It's the only part of the game one player has control over so use it to the team's advantage.
|
|
|
|
Post by airinga on Dec 11, 2018 21:05:03 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by ilikecorn on Dec 11, 2018 21:08:13 GMT -5
For another take, all of Nebraska's main servers have 40 something service errors. To me it always seemed like Minnesota wanted to serve tough, but not at the expense of making 10 service errors a match. I'd like to see more aggressive serving by the Gophers next year! All of 4 of Stanford's main servers have 50+ service errors, Plummer has 69. Though to me, they serve a few too many... Cruz'n can probably attest to that. But the point still stands. For past two years, especially this year, many Stanford fans (and other posters on Stanford page) complain about the high number of service errors we have. I am one of those who has no problem with the high number of SE's. Hambly has stated in chalk talks that he is fine with it too. As long as they are serving aggressively, SE's are acceptable. There are situations where I would prefer a high percentage serve, like when down set point, or trailing when other team has 23. But I would rather have a SE with a tough serve, than a lollypop that is in. Why help the other team get into a rhythm with in-system plays? Do you want opponent to get a point from an in-system crush, or from your own SE? I gladly take the SE. Agreed. I'd much rather have aggressive serving. Pittman was tops on the team with only 28 errors. |
|
