|
Post by eazy on Mar 28, 2021 21:06:23 GMT -5
Crenshaw is probably frontrunner for defensive player of the week. Oglivie is a close second in total digs but because of the sweep I can see them giving it to UW She got aced 7 times and passed over 120 balls as the serving target in two matches. I won't be shocked if she is DPOW but she shouldn't be. To be fair, those are all passing/ball control knocks against her, not “defense”
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2021 21:12:53 GMT -5
She got aced 7 times and passed over 120 balls as the serving target in two matches. I won't be shocked if she is DPOW but she shouldn't be. To be fair, those are all passing/ball control knocks against her, not “defense” And passing is her primary responsibility as libero. Crenshaw was a liability in SR and I don't think passing should be ignored for any libero, let alone one winning DPOW. But that's just my opinion - everyone has one - and I won't be surprised if she does win DPOW.
|
|
|
Post by eazy on Mar 28, 2021 21:21:58 GMT -5
To be fair, those are all passing/ball control knocks against her, not “defense” And passing is her primary responsibility as libero. Crenshaw was a liability in SR and I don't think passing should be ignored for any libero, let alone one winning DPOW. But that's just my opinion - everyone has one - and I won't be surprised if she does win DPOW. I get it, I think it should matter more for awards like “Libero of the year” but if middles can win DPOW with only blocking stats and bad hitting stats, then I understand how a bro could win it with only digging stats but bad SR stats.
|
|
|
Post by hammer on Mar 28, 2021 21:27:32 GMT -5
Excellent preview Washington will romp "I CALLED IT" Bro, you nailed it again.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2021 21:29:26 GMT -5
And passing is her primary responsibility as libero. Crenshaw was a liability in SR and I don't think passing should be ignored for any libero, let alone one winning DPOW. But that's just my opinion - everyone has one - and I won't be surprised if she does win DPOW. I get it, I think it should matter more for awards like “Libero of the year” but if middles can win DPOW with only blocking stats and bad hitting stats, then I understand how a bro could win it with only digging stats but bad SR stats. Passing for a libero is different to hitting for a MB. Exploiting Crenshaw in SR was key to Stanford's game plan. I think it's hard to justify giving any awards to a player that was crucial to their opponent's success.
|
|
|
Post by eazy on Mar 28, 2021 21:34:38 GMT -5
I get it, I think it should matter more for awards like “Libero of the year” but if middles can win DPOW with only blocking stats and bad hitting stats, then I understand how a bro could win it with only digging stats but bad SR stats. SR for a libero is different to hitting for a MB. Exploiting Crenshaw in SR was key to Stanford's game plan. I think it's hard to justify giving any awards to a player that was crucial to their opponent's success. Nuances like that would require the people selecting the awards to understand them. Isn’t it usually interns at the conference office?
|
|
|
Post by oldnewbie on Mar 28, 2021 22:10:44 GMT -5
My son asked me what the highest set score is in the rally scoring era. Anybody know? I don't know, but I've seen enough sets in the high 30s that I'm pretty sure it must be in the 40s. Oregon scored 41 against Minnesota a couple of years ago in the tourney, so just the tourney record is at least that high. I would expect the regular season record to be substantially higher, maybe high 40's or even to 50?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2021 22:34:46 GMT -5
I don't know, but I've seen enough sets in the high 30s that I'm pretty sure it must be in the 40s. Oregon scored 41 against Minnesota a couple of years ago in the tourney, so just the tourney record is at least that high. I would expect the regular season record to be substantially higher, maybe high 40's or even to 50? I looked it up: In the 25-point era it’s 46, scored by Santa Clara against St. Mary’s in 2017. In the 30-point era it was 48, scored by Georgia Tech against Minnesota in 2004. In the side-out era it was 28, scored by Navy against Loyola-Maryland in 2000. Edit: there are lots of cool stats here! fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/w_volleyball_RB/2020/D1.pdf
|
|
|
Post by bucky415 on Mar 28, 2021 23:11:49 GMT -5
Oregon scored 41 against Minnesota a couple of years ago in the tourney, so just the tourney record is at least that high. I would expect the regular season record to be substantially higher, maybe high 40's or even to 50? I looked it up: In the 25-point era it’s 46, scored by Santa Clara against St. Mary’s in 2017. In the 30-point era it was 48, scored by Georgia Tech against Minnesota in 2004. In the side-out era it was 28, scored by Navy against Loyola-Maryland in 2000. That regional in Minneapolis in 2004 must have been epic to watch. If memory serves, Minnesota eliminated Stacey Gordon and the Buckeyes in another epic match the next night. Going back to the topic at hand, congrats to the Huskies on the wins, and, while I get this year is just nuts in general, I won't shed any tears about Stanford missing the NCAA tournament, for obvious reasons.
|
|
|
Post by ShaneM2005 on Mar 29, 2021 13:27:28 GMT -5
I looked it up: In the 25-point era it’s 46, scored by Santa Clara against St. Mary’s in 2017. In the 30-point era it was 48, scored by Georgia Tech against Minnesota in 2004. In the side-out era it was 28, scored by Navy against Loyola-Maryland in 2000. That regional in Minneapolis in 2004 must have been epic to watch. If memory serves, Minnesota eliminated Stacey Gordon and the Buckeyes in another epic match the next night. Going back to the topic at hand, congrats to the Huskies on the wins, and, while I get this year is just nuts in general, I won't shed any tears about Stanford missing the NCAA tournament, for obvious reasons. Haters gonna hate.
|
|
|
Post by coconutcandles on Mar 30, 2021 22:24:35 GMT -5
God bless whoever posted this
|
|
|
Post by oldunc on Apr 1, 2021 17:38:43 GMT -5
Hmph- finally got around to seeing what turned out to be the season finale for Stanford; I think they did very well to achieve watchability under the circumstances, so way to go ladies- next year could be good. Hate to grump about the PAC12 network, who are clearly not having an easier time of things than anyone else, but if you're going to compress an exceptionally long five set match into an hour and a half slot why are you showing time outs and breaks for reviews?
|
|