|
Post by donut on Apr 19, 2020 12:34:48 GMT -5
A blind set to the alternative? What? I'm not sure why this confused you. You don't know what a blind set is or you don't know why it causes issues OOS? I was confused by your use of "alternative," hence why it was italicized. Still waiting on examples!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2020 12:50:19 GMT -5
I'm not sure why this confused you. You don't know what a blind set is or you don't know why it causes issues OOS? I was confused by your use of "alternative," hence why it was italicized. Still waiting on examples! Setting what you can see, obviously. Your statement that [terminating OOS is] "usually job #1 for an opposite" is false Depending on whether you split or stack your hitters in RO1, your oppo will hit from the right in every rotation unless you flip your hitters, in which case, the opp hits from the left anyway and sure, they're your OOS terminator. UltimateLy it comes down to matchups at every level and you'll always find variation depending on who is on the floor for each team but suggesting that the #1 job of an oppo is to terminate OOS is simply not true.
|
|
libro
Sophomore
Posts: 120
|
Post by libro on Apr 19, 2020 13:18:07 GMT -5
I was confused by your use of "alternative," hence why it was italicized. Still waiting on examples! Setting what you can see, obviously. Your statement that [terminating OOS is] "usually job #1 for an opposite" is false Depending on whether you split or stack your hitters in RO1, your oppo will hit from the right in every rotation unless you flip your hitters, in which case, the opp hits from the left anyway and sure, they're your OOS terminator. UltimateLy it comes down to matchups at every level and you'll always find variation depending on who is on the floor for each team but suggesting that the #1 job of an oppo is to terminate OOS is simply not true. I think with the best teams in the world being nearly unstoppable in system, I personally believe only the best teams in the game can only be the best by having an OOS hitter that can put nearly anything away, which for some reason, in the modern men’s and women’s game, is the oppo, the trash-taker-outer, and that’s not something that new to the game. Your heavy hitter is generally your opp. Men’s d1 collegiate is a lot run like that too and they’re adhering to the way a lot of the rest of the world does it. China is prob the loan exception bc Korea just doesn’t set well enough for KYK to be that terminal now
|
|
|
Post by donut on Apr 19, 2020 13:28:39 GMT -5
I was confused by your use of "alternative," hence why it was italicized. Still waiting on examples! Setting what you can see, obviously. Your statement that [terminating OOS is] "usually job #1 for an opposite" is false Depending on whether you split or stack your hitters in RO1, your oppo will hit from the right in every other rotation unless you flip your hitters, in which case, the opp hits from the left anyway and sure, they're your OOS terminator. UltimateLy it comes down to matchups at every level and you'll always find variation for depending on who is on the floor for each team but suggesting that the #1 job of an oppo is to terminate OOS is simply not true. Serious question: do you even watch international volleyball? You're acting like blind setting is an issue for good international setters, and that a ton (if not the vast majority) of OOS hitting doesn't happen in long rallies, where "blind setting" is less of an "issue." Good international teams, in general, do not systematically send balls to the left OOS. And the fact that you can't provide evidence (ironically) other than the main acknowledged exception (Zhu), speaks volumes. Opposites' main job is terminating. Naturally, what falls underneath that, is OOS terminating. So sure, maybe it's job #1b, but if someone on the court generally has that responsibility, it's the Opposite, not the OH (counter to your patently false suggestion about Russia and Gonch being an outlier). In-system, most setters are going to distribute the ball much more to keep middles and OHs involved (you haven't disputed this). That distribution shifts OOS and in rallies when OHs, middles or liberos are often taking the second balls. There's a reason you don't see the Opposite stepping in to take many OOS balls. It's because they're the main targets for OOS swings, regardless of where they are on the court. Counter to what you've suggested, Vargas, Haak, Lippman, Boz, Darnel, Brakocevic, Boskovic, Gamova, Sheila, Hooker, Rykhliuk, Egonu, Smarzek, Goncharova (do I need to go on) do not take the most OOS swings because they hit from the left, or because they don't have a good OH, or because of match-ups. It's because that's their role on the team as an opposite, and that's what they've trained for. Until you can engage with what's actually going on at the international level, there's no point in continuing this conversation.
|
|
|
Post by Disc808 on Apr 19, 2020 13:41:57 GMT -5
Can we take this to DM’s lol
|
|
|
Post by jwvolley on Apr 19, 2020 13:49:20 GMT -5
Can we take this to DM’s lol No hush, this is entertaining and I for one need some entertainment
|
|
|
Post by Disc808 on Apr 19, 2020 14:00:59 GMT -5
Can we take this to DM’s lol No hush, this is entertaining and I for one need some entertainment Seems like all this time at home is making us bored lolol
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2020 14:03:44 GMT -5
Setting what you can see, obviously. Your statement that [terminating OOS is] "usually job #1 for an opposite" is false Depending on whether you split or stack your hitters in RO1, your oppo will hit from the right in every other rotation unless you flip your hitters, in which case, the opp hits from the left anyway and sure, they're your OOS terminator. UltimateLy it comes down to matchups at every level and you'll always find variation for depending on who is on the floor for each team but suggesting that the #1 job of an oppo is to terminate OOS is simply not true. Serious question: do you even watch international volleyball? You're acting like blind setting is an issue for good international setters, and that a ton (if not the vast majority) of OOS hitting doesn't happen in long rallies, where "blind setting" is less of an "issue." Good international teams, in general, do not systematically send balls to the left OOS. And the fact that you can't provide evidence (ironically) other than the main acknowledged exception (Zhu), speaks volumes. Opposites' main job is terminating. Naturally, what falls underneath that, is OOS terminating. So sure, maybe it's job #1b, but if someone on the court generally has that responsibility, it's the Opposite, not the OH (counter to your patently false suggestion about Russia and Gonch being an outlier). In-system, most setters are going to distribute the ball much more to keep middles and OHs involved (you haven't disputed this). That distribution shifts OOS and in rallies when OHs, middles or liberos are often taking the second balls. There's a reason you don't see the Opposite stepping in to take many OOS balls. It's because they're the main targets for OOS swings, regardless of where they are on the court. Counter to what you've suggested, Vargas, Haak, Lippman, Boz, Darnel, Brakocevic, Boskovic, Gamova, Sheila, Hooker, Rykhliuk, Egonu, Smarzek, Goncharova (do I need to go on) do not take the most OOS swings because they hit from the left, or because they don't have a good OH, or because of match-ups. It's because that's their role on the team as an opposite, and that's what they've trained for. Until you can engage with what's actually going on at the international level, there's no point in continuing this conversation. OK, so let's actually engage on the international level... Rather than you stating what you think is true without any evidence. I pulled up the September 8 match between Italy and Poland. It seemed like a good choice since it's the most recent Italian match and you said both of these teams go to the Oppo primarily when they're OOS. I went thru and watched each OOS attack. There's 35 in total, 16 for Italy and 19 for Poland. I noted where they went on each set; right side, left side or back row. The numbers were as follows; Italy: 7 left side - 4 right side - 5 back row Poland: 11 Left side - 7 right side - 1 back row. This is about what I expected. A slight edge to the left side hitter. Even at the international level, blind setting isn't a given (you can see that on the first play of the match when Malinov goes to Egonu OOS and it results in a tip). They move the ball around after a poor first contact, even though both teams have dominant Oppos who each got set more than any other hitter IN SYSTEM. Obviously if you've got a team like China, whose best hitter is also an Outside, they'll get the lion's share of the swings both in and out of system. I hope that is specific enough for you.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Apr 19, 2020 14:20:26 GMT -5
I don't get why people are reluctant to give KP chances, I mean, she's one of the most successful NCAA player ever, she cannot be that bad... I don't think anybody is unwilling to "give Plummer a chance", but giving someone a chance usually means playing your way onto the roster, not just being anointed because you were good (no, let's be fair, excellent) in college. (By the way, I assume you don't mean "give Plummer a chance" to be libero, because I'm pretty sure that's not in the cards.)
|
|
|
Post by VolleyTX on Apr 19, 2020 14:29:51 GMT -5
KYK has been Top 3 for the past decade (and arguably #1 in terms of overall game) and Korea hasn't won a single world medal, only getting close once. I also think it's really tough for USA Volleyball to claim they can't win without the very top athletes, when they are perfectly happy to let elite athletes at that level walk if they don't fit the "culture" KYK's longetivity at the top of the game is pretty remarkable. I would take her over Zhu Ting in a heartbeat. I'm so surprised by everyone's glowing talk about KYK. She has been a phenomenal player, but I don't think she is the same player she was. Most of the matches I've seen her play in the last couples years her offensive output has been mediocre at best.
|
|
libro
Sophomore
Posts: 120
|
Post by libro on Apr 19, 2020 14:30:18 GMT -5
I don't get why people are reluctant to give KP chances, I mean, she's one of the most successful NCAA player ever, she cannot be that bad... I don't think anybody is unwilling to "give Plummer a chance", but giving someone a chance usually means playing your way onto the roster, not just being anointed because you were good (no, let's be fair, excellent) in college. (By the way, I assume you don't mean "give Plummer a chance" to be libero, because I'm pretty sure that's not in the cards.) Are you sure? Plummer as lib might open the world to tall liberos! Think about that wing span and court coverage lol. Covering a tip is just falling and extending ur whole body if ur 6’6
|
|
|
Post by donut on Apr 19, 2020 14:31:26 GMT -5
Serious question: do you even watch international volleyball? You're acting like blind setting is an issue for good international setters, and that a ton (if not the vast majority) of OOS hitting doesn't happen in long rallies, where "blind setting" is less of an "issue." Good international teams, in general, do not systematically send balls to the left OOS. And the fact that you can't provide evidence (ironically) other than the main acknowledged exception (Zhu), speaks volumes. Opposites' main job is terminating. Naturally, what falls underneath that, is OOS terminating. So sure, maybe it's job #1b, but if someone on the court generally has that responsibility, it's the Opposite, not the OH (counter to your patently false suggestion about Russia and Gonch being an outlier). In-system, most setters are going to distribute the ball much more to keep middles and OHs involved (you haven't disputed this). That distribution shifts OOS and in rallies when OHs, middles or liberos are often taking the second balls. There's a reason you don't see the Opposite stepping in to take many OOS balls. It's because they're the main targets for OOS swings, regardless of where they are on the court. Counter to what you've suggested, Vargas, Haak, Lippman, Boz, Darnel, Brakocevic, Boskovic, Gamova, Sheila, Hooker, Rykhliuk, Egonu, Smarzek, Goncharova (do I need to go on) do not take the most OOS swings because they hit from the left, or because they don't have a good OH, or because of match-ups. It's because that's their role on the team as an opposite, and that's what they've trained for. Until you can engage with what's actually going on at the international level, there's no point in continuing this conversation. OK, so let's actually engage on the international level... Rather than you stating what you think is true without any evidence. I pulled up the September 8 match between Italy and Poland. It seemed like a good choice since it's the most recent Italian match and you said both of these teams go to the Oppo primarily when they're OOS. I went thru and watched each OOS attack. There's 35 in total, 16 for Italy and 19 for Poland. I noted where they went on each set; right side, left side or back row. The numbers were as follows; Italy: 7 left side - 4 right side - 5 back row Poland: 11 Left side - 7 right side - 1 back row. This is about what I expected. A slight edge to the left side hitter. Even at the international level, blind setting isn't a given (you can see that on the first play of the match when Malinov goes to Egonu OOS and it results in a tip). They move the ball around after a poor first contact, even though both teams have dominant Oppos who each got set more than any other hitter IN SYSTEM. Obviously if you've got a team like China, whose best hitter is also an Outside, they'll get the lion's share of the swings both in and out of system. I hope that is specific enough for you. Lol what does a back row/right side/left side breakdown prove when discussing OHs and OPPs. You do realize OPPs and OHs can hit out of all three of those locations? And now you’re the one attacking a straw man. I never said an opposite wouldn’t get more swings than any other hitter in-system. I said proportionally, I think they get even more swings OOS than in-system (for example, 40% of the teams swings in-system, 60% of the teams swings OOS). Intuitively this makes sense because often the middles aren’t available OOS, and again, OPPs’ role is to terminate. On average, I’m sure OHs % of swings increases too, but probably by not as much.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2020 14:34:20 GMT -5
KYK's longetivity at the top of the game is pretty remarkable. I would take her over Zhu Ting in a heartbeat. I'm so surprised by everyone's glowing talk about KYK. She has been a phenomenal player, but I don't think she is the same player she was. Most of the matches I've seen her play in the last couples years her offensive output has been mediocre at best. Genuine question; did you get a chance to watch the 2019 World Cup? I didn't think she was mediocre at all. She hit .350 and terminated 44% of her swings. She hit nearly .400 in wins over Serbia & Japan.
|
|
|
Post by VolleyTX on Apr 19, 2020 14:38:49 GMT -5
I'm so surprised by everyone's glowing talk about KYK. She has been a phenomenal player, but I don't think she is the same player she was. Most of the matches I've seen her play in the last couples years her offensive output has been mediocre at best. Genuine question; did you get a chance to watch the 2019 World Cup? I didn't think she was mediocre at all. She hit .350 and terminated 44% of her swings. She hit nearly .400 in wins over Serbia & Japan. I did not see her in the World Cup. Mostly, I've been watching her play for her Turkish club team.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2020 14:41:45 GMT -5
OK, so let's actually engage on the international level... Rather than you stating what you think is true without any evidence. I pulled up the September 8 match between Italy and Poland. It seemed like a good choice since it's the most recent Italian match and you said both of these teams go to the Oppo primarily when they're OOS. I went thru and watched each OOS attack. There's 35 in total, 16 for Italy and 19 for Poland. I noted where they went on each set; right side, left side or back row. The numbers were as follows; Italy: 7 left side - 4 right side - 5 back row Poland: 11 Left side - 7 right side - 1 back row. This is about what I expected. A slight edge to the left side hitter. Even at the international level, blind setting isn't a given (you can see that on the first play of the match when Malinov goes to Egonu OOS and it results in a tip). They move the ball around after a poor first contact, even though both teams have dominant Oppos who each got set more than any other hitter IN SYSTEM. Obviously if you've got a team like China, whose best hitter is also an Outside, they'll get the lion's share of the swings both in and out of system. I hope that is specific enough for you. Lol what does a back row/right side/left side breakdown prove when discussing OHs and OPPs. You do realize OPPs and OHs can hit out of all three of those locations? And now you’re the one attacking a straw man. I never said an opposite wouldn’t get more swings than any other hitter in-system. I said proportionally, I think they get even more swings OOS than in-system (for example, 40% of the teams swings in-system, 60% of the teams swings OOS). Intuitively this makes sense because often the middles aren’t available OOS, and again, OPPs’ role is to terminate. On average, I’m sure OHs % of swings increases too, but probably by not as much. You said good teams don't go left OOS. See? Good international teams, in general, do not systematically send balls to the left OOS. They go left a large amount of the time. Are you backing off that statement now? My issue was with your claim that terminating OOS balls is the PRIMARY job of an Oppo. That isn't the case. Their primary job (as I stated) is terminating IN SYSTEM balls. Out of system you cannot make that claim (and be correct) but I can keep on bringing up matches to show you the distribution if you still can't acknowledge that your initial statement, and the above one, were wrong.
|
|