|
Post by Vball Fandom on Apr 27, 2021 20:30:48 GMT -5
When comparing lost seniors to the other final 4 teams UW is in decent shape. Based on other threads, Kentucky loses Gabby Curry, Madison Lilley, Kendyl Paris and Avery Skinner. Wisconsin returns Sydney Hilley, Lauren Barnes but I'm guessing they'll lose Rettke and Haggerty. Texas will remain virtually intact. Where things really start getting interesting is with the Nebraskas, Floridas and etc of the world. Here is where I start praying we again get a high seed and/or Bays turns out to be money. Winning PAC=High Seed...that's what we need....and it won't be easy!!
|
|
|
Post by redbeard2008 on Apr 27, 2021 20:32:11 GMT -5
Yes, but I sure like this year's draw over last years. The consolation of being a Top 4 seed is not being dumped in Nebraska's regional, again, but then Nebraska would probably be sent to Seattle.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Apr 27, 2021 21:44:42 GMT -5
The UW was not a top 4 seed this year, although I believe they demonstrated that they should have been.
I am still annoyed that the NCAA seeded three B1G teams ahead of the PAC-12 champs, but in fact it took the National Champions to knock the Huskies out in the Final Four. (I will also point out that the Huskies took a set off of Kentucky, while Wisconsin got swept by Texas, which makes me question why Wisconsin nevertheless still got voted above the Huskies in the final poll.)
I think the tournament results showed that the B1G was not the elite "head-and-shoulders-above-everyone-else" conference that the Committee clearly thought they were when they made the seedings.
|
|
|
Post by isaacspaceman on Apr 28, 2021 1:01:41 GMT -5
I am still annoyed that the NCAA seeded three B1G teams ahead of the PAC-12 champs, but in fact it took the National Champions to knock the Huskies out in the Final Four. (I will also point out that the Huskies took a set off of Kentucky, while Wisconsin got swept by Texas, which makes me question why Wisconsin nevertheless still got voted above the Huskies in the final poll.). I agree that Washington outperformed all three higher-seeded Big 10 teams in the tournament, and that if you just look at the tournament, UW deserved to be ranked third. But when you consider the entire season, I find it hard to disagree with either the seed or the final ranking. Going into the tournament, I think it was reasonable to say that UW’s three losses (splits with OU, UCLA, and ASU) were slightly worse than Nebraska’s losses (splits with Minnesota and Ohio State) and Minnesota’s losses (split with Nebraska, loss to Wisconsin). I think it was both fair at the time and fair in retrospect to believe that all three of the teams that Minn/Neb lost to were better than all three of the teams to whom UW lost. Likewise, the Neb/Minn split helped them, since it meant they each had a win better than any win on UW’s resume. There were weird calibration problems, obviously, but I think it’s reasonable to say that Nebraska and Minnesota went into the tournament with better resumes than UW. As for final rankings, if they were based solely on tournament resume, I’d rank UW third. But if you consider the season as a whole, it’s really hard to separate the two UWs. Wisconsin had fewer losses, but got lots of rest when COVID cancelled some of its toughest matches. In the tournament, Washington played better against the champ than Wisconsin played against the runner-up, but Washington also struggled in earlier rounds; then again, Wisconsin benefited from a BYU scheduling quirk. Washington clearly improved over the course of the season, and Wisconsin maybe didn’t. To me, it was a coin toss between the two of them. I suspect the AVCA voters just said “Washington has three more losses than Wisconsin” and settled it on that basis. What I have a harder time understanding is how a Final Four team that returns all of its contributors except for an occasional serving specialist who was a defensive liability, and who adds one and maybe two players who could solve its biggest problems (Bays and Griffin; passing and defense) isn’t a bigger favorite for the 2021 fall conference title.
|
|
|
Post by redbeard2008 on Apr 28, 2021 18:10:28 GMT -5
What I have a harder time understanding is how a Final Four team that returns all of its contributors except for an occasional serving specialist who was a defensive liability, and who adds one and maybe two players who could solve its biggest problems (Bays and Griffin; passing and defense) isn’t a bigger favorite for the 2021 fall conference title. I suspect the expectation is that Stanford will be back to normal and reclaim their rightful place at the head of the Pac. UW, UCLA, and Oregon will have something to say about that, however. McClure is gone and, so, much of their passing. They are young and lost much of their development time. Hambly has yet to show that he can win with his players, rather than Dunning's.
|
|
|
Post by redbeard2008 on Apr 29, 2021 18:08:48 GMT -5
OH1: Endsley, Bush OH2: Hoffman, Wilmes MB1: Sanders MB2: Grote/Summers OPP: Drechsel, Cole S: Powell, Mikkelsen, Wilson L: Crenshaw/Bays DS: Calle/Houghton/Griffin
I believe UW can have 14 scholarship players next fall. Assuming that either Mikkelsen or Wilson are a walk-on, and Calle, Houghton, and Griffin are walk-ons, that would leave UW with one scholarship available (for a transfer). If they give it to a walk-on, it'll probably go to Calle.
|
|
|
Post by udubhuskiefan on Apr 29, 2021 18:21:22 GMT -5
I think Bush can really make some noise. I don’t think she’ll unseat Endsley, but in the future she’ll be such a dynamic attacker for UW.
|
|
|
Post by isaacspaceman on Apr 29, 2021 22:02:07 GMT -5
What I have a harder time understanding is how a Final Four team that returns all of its contributors except for an occasional serving specialist who was a defensive liability, and who adds one and maybe two players who could solve its biggest problems (Bays and Griffin; passing and defense) isn’t a bigger favorite for the 2021 fall conference title. I suspect the expectation is that Stanford will be back to normal and reclaim their rightful place at the head of the Pac. UW, UCLA, and Oregon will have something to say about that, however. McClure is gone and, so, much of their passing. They are young and lost much of their development time. Hambly has yet to show that he can win with his players, rather than Dunning's. I get it, and I get why people think UCLA will be better with Chang back (they beat UW with her, after all) and why they think USC will be strong with the incoming transfers. But UW made the Final Four without ever hitting its ceiling. Do people think Stanford/UCLA/USC/Oregon are presumptively better than that?
|
|
|
Post by redbeard2008 on Apr 29, 2021 22:17:30 GMT -5
I get it, and I get why people think UCLA will be better with Chang back (they beat UW with her, after all) and why they think USC will be strong with the incoming transfers. But UW made the Final Four without ever hitting its ceiling. Do people think Stanford/UCLA/USC/Oregon are presumptively better than that? Chang went down in Set 1 of the UCLA victory over UW, so it would be more accurate to say that they mostly beat UW without her. UW did beat UCLA without her.
|
|
|
Post by baytree on Apr 29, 2021 23:08:00 GMT -5
I am still annoyed that the NCAA seeded three B1G teams ahead of the PAC-12 champs, but in fact it took the National Champions to knock the Huskies out in the Final Four. (I will also point out that the Huskies took a set off of Kentucky, while Wisconsin got swept by Texas, which makes me question why Wisconsin nevertheless still got voted above the Huskies in the final poll.). What I have a harder time understanding is how a Final Four team that returns all of its contributors except for an occasional serving specialist who was a defensive liability, and who adds one and maybe two players who could solve its biggest problems (Bays and Griffin; passing and defense) isn’t a bigger favorite for the 2021 fall conference title. Several teams took Washington to 5 sets last season: Arizona, Colorado, Oregon, USC, and Stanford. Arizona State and UCLA beat them. WSU never played them. If someone thought that any of those teams will probably improve more than Washington does next season, it's not really a stretch to choose them over Washington.
Granted, Washington won the other match against UCLA and Arizona State. In their other matches against the teams that took them to five sets, they swept all of them except for Stanford, who they beat 3-1. They went further in the NCAA tournament than Washington State. But WSU had at least one key player who couldn't play in all the sets in the tournament so IMO it's still not clear whether Washington or WSU was better last season (in terms of predicting who would have won a 5-match series at a neutral site with all players healthy).
|
|
|
Post by coconutcandles on Apr 30, 2021 1:29:20 GMT -5
I think Bush can really make some noise. I don’t think she’ll unseat Endsley, but in the future she’ll be such a dynamic attacker for UW. bush has also played a lot of OPP so I wouldn’t be surprised to see her there after drechsel. It’s unfortunate that to give Drechsel the playing time she deserves we can’t really have bush in. She’s super good
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Apr 30, 2021 3:01:31 GMT -5
What I have a harder time understanding is how a Final Four team that returns all of its contributors except for an occasional serving specialist who was a defensive liability, and who adds one and maybe two players who could solve its biggest problems (Bays and Griffin; passing and defense) isn’t a bigger favorite for the 2021 fall conference title. Several teams took Washington to 5 sets last season: Arizona, Colorado, Oregon, USC, and Stanford. Arizona State and UCLA beat them. WSU never played them. If someone thought that any of those teams will probably improve more than Washington does next season, it's not really a stretch to choose them over Washington.
Granted, Washington won the other match against UCLA and Arizona State. In their other matches against the teams that took them to five sets, they swept all of them except for Stanford, who they beat 3-1. They went further in the NCAA tournament than Washington State. But WSU had at least one key player who couldn't play in all the sets in the tournament so IMO it's still not clear whether Washington or WSU was better last season (in terms of predicting who would have won a 5-match series at a neutral site with all players healthy). In the end, you are what your record is. UW was 17-3 in conference and got to the Final Four. WSU was 11-4 in conference and lost their only tournament match. And to be blunt, protecting yourself from COVID was part of the spring 2021 season, so I also credit UW for not being the cause of any COVID cancellations. The reason the two teams didn't play last year was because of WSU, not because of the UW. So go start a Cougar thread if you want to start claiming that WSU was better than the Huskies this past season.
|
|
|
Post by udubhuskiefan on Apr 30, 2021 7:08:59 GMT -5
I think Bush can really make some noise. I don’t think she’ll unseat Endsley, but in the future she’ll be such a dynamic attacker for UW. bush has also played a lot of OPP so I wouldn’t be surprised to see her there after drechsel. It’s unfortunate that to give Drechsel the playing time she deserves we can’t really have bush in. She’s super good Drechsel is so reliable for us, though I really think she peaked mid-season. I think this fall will be good for Bush - she'll be able to have almost a full year of UW training to slot in at OPP/OH, depending on what the coaching staff thinks. I am also high on Wilmes. I think she will take Claire's spot once she graduates. How is her passing?
|
|
|
Post by baytree on Apr 30, 2021 8:42:59 GMT -5
Several teams took Washington to 5 sets last season: Arizona, Colorado, Oregon, USC, and Stanford. Arizona State and UCLA beat them. WSU never played them. If someone thought that any of those teams will probably improve more than Washington does next season, it's not really a stretch to choose them over Washington.
Granted, Washington won the other match against UCLA and Arizona State. In their other matches against the teams that took them to five sets, they swept all of them except for Stanford, who they beat 3-1. They went further in the NCAA tournament than Washington State. But WSU had at least one key player who couldn't play in all the sets in the tournament so IMO it's still not clear whether Washington or WSU was better last season (in terms of predicting who would have won a 5-match series at a neutral site with all players healthy). In the end, you are what your record is. UW was 17-3 in conference and got to the Final Four. WSU was 11-4 in conference and lost their only tournament match. And to be blunt, protecting yourself from COVID was part of the spring 2021 season, so I also credit UW for not being the cause of any COVID cancellations. The reason the two teams didn't play last year was because of WSU, not because of the UW. So go start a Cougar thread if you want to start claiming that WSU was better than the Huskies this past season. Mike, you usually have better reading comprehension. I never claimed WSU was better, I said it wasn't clear if Washington or WSU was.
This is about predicting who will be better next season; I hope COVID won't be a major concern. I'm not sure how much a team was affected by COVID this season has to do with how well they'll do next season. IMO it's extremely reasonable to think that a team that was more affected by COVID (or injuries) than Washington might not have those problems next season.
|
|
|
Post by blue-footedbooby on Apr 30, 2021 9:26:27 GMT -5
From a tourney eye test I thought UW looked much better than WSU. WKU, which beat WSU, got shellacked by Kentucky whereas UW was a call reversal away from going 5 with the cats. For spring, UW will have an infusion of talent and I can see UWs passing being much improved. And with Endsley assuming MBs serving duties, UW serving could be lights out.
I'm in the dark when it comes to WSUs fall upgrades and additions so call my opinion one sided to this the point. Regardless, they'll both have great teams and matches will be competitive and fun to watch.
|
|