|
|
Post by pepperbrooks on Jun 1, 2021 15:53:09 GMT -5
USA Stats: Robinson: 10k, 5 error, 28 att (.179); 1 blk; 1 ace; 15 digs Larson: 8k, 2 error, 31 att (.194); 1 blk; 1 ace; 14 digs Drews: 9k, 4 error, 25 att (.200); 2 blks; 12 digs Akinradewo: 8k, 3 error, 14 att (.357); 1 blk; 2 digs Dixon: 3k, 1 error, 11 att (.182); 2 aces; 3 digs Hancock: 3k, 5 att (.600); 2 aces; 11 digs; 34 assists I’m confused as to how we look at these hitting percentages and then simultaneously praise Hancock for what a good job she did setting the offense. It's very subjective to only look at hitting percentages. Maybe the sets / decisions were good and the hitters made terrible decisions, or maybe the sets / decisions were bad and the hitters couldn't do anything about it? |
|
|
|
Post by Hawk Attack on Jun 1, 2021 15:53:45 GMT -5
I’m confused as to how we look at these hitting percentages and then simultaneously praise Hancock for what a good job she did setting the offense. I’m confused by the idea that attack pct only indicates the quality of setting? I’m not advocating for Hancock or making any comment on her setting, just pointing out what I thought would be obvious that several things are determiners of attack pct. It’s quite possible one of our most veteran attacking lineups could all (minus Akinradewo) be posting mediocre to not good attacking stats while simultaneously having great reception and setting... but that doesn’t seem to make sense. Hence, the confusion. |
|
|
|
Post by vballfan17 on Jun 1, 2021 15:54:56 GMT -5
I wonder if Karch is even considering SWP/KP on the right side. Kinda thought that leaving Lowe at home meant we might see some tinkering, but looks like he’s sticking with JT/Drews.
If he's going to tinker this VNL, tomorrow's the day.
Could we see KP at L to get her more tested in passing? Lol |
|
|
|
Post by chenny11 on Jun 1, 2021 15:59:47 GMT -5
Off topic, but I’d love to see Jonni Parker hitting right side for the NT one day. She’s undersized, but she’s obviously a great hitter and her defense is so great, especially compared to Drews and JT.
|
|
|
|
Post by gibbyb1 on Jun 1, 2021 16:01:07 GMT -5
I’m confused by the idea that attack pct only indicates the quality of setting? I’m not advocating for Hancock or making any comment on her setting, just pointing out what I thought would be obvious that several things are determiners of attack pct. It’s quite possible one of our most veteran attacking lineups could all (minus Akinradewo) be posting mediocre to not good attacking stats while simultaneously having great reception and setting... but that doesn’t seem to make sense. Hence, the confusion. I see your point. |
|
|
|
Post by gibbyb1 on Jun 1, 2021 16:02:23 GMT -5
Off topic, but I’d love to see Jonni Parker hitting right side for the NT one day. She’s undersized, but she’s obviously a great hitter and her defense is so great, especially compared to Drews and JT. That’s just not going to happen and her defense as great is really generous. I like Parker a lot, but this is another level. |
|
|
|
Post by vballfan17 on Jun 1, 2021 16:29:36 GMT -5
Off topic, but I’d love to see Jonni Parker hitting right side for the NT one day. She’s undersized, but she’s obviously a great hitter and her defense is so great, especially compared to Drews and JT. That’s just not going to happen and her defense as great is really generous. I like Parker a lot, but this is another level. I'm sure some said the same about Drews when she was in college, so I wouldn't rule it out. Although, I would agree that she is a bit undersized. |
|
|
|
Post by basil on Jun 1, 2021 16:44:38 GMT -5
I’m confused by the idea that attack pct only indicates the quality of setting? I’m not advocating for Hancock or making any comment on her setting, just pointing out what I thought would be obvious that several things are determiners of attack pct. It’s quite possible one of our most veteran attacking lineups could all (minus Akinradewo) be posting mediocre to not good attacking stats while simultaneously having great reception and setting... but that doesn’t seem to make sense. Hence, the confusion. I hear what you're saying. I'd be interested to see what those stats look like with the first set separated from the second and third set. There were so many balls just hit clean out of bounds in the first. Granted I'm not in the stadium, but it generally seemed like the sets were in a fine location, at least compared to all the misconnections from yesterday's match with Serbia. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 1, 2021 16:53:13 GMT -5
It’s quite possible one of our most veteran attacking lineups could all (minus Akinradewo) be posting mediocre to not good attacking stats while simultaneously having great reception and setting... but that doesn’t seem to make sense. Hence, the confusion. I hear what you're saying. I'd be interested to see what those stats look like with the first set separated from the second and third set. There were so many balls just hit clean out of bounds in the first. Granted I'm not in the stadium, but it generally seemed like the sets were in a fine location, at least compared to all the misconnections from yesterday's match with Serbia. Set 1 Dixon: .167 Larson: .300 Drews: .333 Foluke: .750 Krob: -.200 Set 2 Dixon: .333 Larson: .222 Drews: .167 Foluke: -.250 Krob: .375 Set 3 Dixon: .000 Larson: .083 Drews: .143 Foluke: .500 Krob: .400 |
|
|
|
Post by basil on Jun 1, 2021 16:59:17 GMT -5
I hear what you're saying. I'd be interested to see what those stats look like with the first set separated from the second and third set. There were so many balls just hit clean out of bounds in the first. Granted I'm not in the stadium, but it generally seemed like the sets were in a fine location, at least compared to all the misconnections from yesterday's match with Serbia. Set 1 Dixon: .167 Larson: .300 Drews: .333 Foluke: .750 Krob: -.200 Set 2 Dixon: .333 Larson: .222 Drews: .167 Foluke: -.250 Krob: .375 Set 3 Dixon: .000 Larson: .083 Drews: .143 Foluke: .500 Krob: .400 Hmmm. I guess I have to revoke my of #HancockHerd...sadly. It's kinda weird. |
|
|
|
Post by nevball17 on Jun 1, 2021 17:27:31 GMT -5
Set 1 Dixon: .167 Larson: .300 Drews: .333 Foluke: .750 Krob: -.200 Set 2 Dixon: .333 Larson: .222 Drews: .167 Foluke: -.250 Krob: .375 Set 3 Dixon: .000 Larson: .083 Drews: .143 Foluke: .500 Krob: .400 Hmmm. I guess I have to revoke my of #HancockHerd...sadly. It's kinda weird. The defense seemed way better this game. A lot of long rallies which means more out of system swings. The USA had 88 digs compared to 68 vs Serbia and 41 vs DR. |
|
|
|
Post by gibbyb1 on Jun 1, 2021 17:42:25 GMT -5
That’s just not going to happen and her defense as great is really generous. I like Parker a lot, but this is another level. I'm sure some said the same about Drews when she was in college, so I wouldn't rule it out. Although, I would agree that she is a bit undersized. Well Annie Drews is 6’4 and while I would t have predicted this level of success, she was certainly someone who had the tools to be in the NT gym. I’m comfortable ruling it out, and like I said, I’m a Parker fan, I love how hard she competes. |
|
|
|
Post by Reach on Jun 1, 2021 17:44:25 GMT -5
Set 1 Dixon: .167 Larson: .300 Drews: .333 Foluke: .750 Krob: -.200 Set 2 Dixon: .333 Larson: .222 Drews: .167 Foluke: -.250 Krob: .375 Set 3 Dixon: .000 Larson: .083 Drews: .143 Foluke: .500 Krob: .400 Hmmm. I guess I have to revoke my of #HancockHerd...sadly. It's kinda weird. Lol |
|
|
|
Post by vbkahuna on Jun 1, 2021 17:55:41 GMT -5
USA Stats: Robinson: 10k, 5 error, 28 att (.179); 1 blk; 1 ace; 15 digs Larson: 8k, 2 error, 31 att (.194); 1 blk; 1 ace; 14 digs Drews: 9k, 4 error, 25 att (.200); 2 blks; 12 digs Akinradewo: 8k, 3 error, 14 att (.357); 1 blk; 2 digs Dixon: 3k, 1 error, 11 att (.182); 2 aces; 3 digs Hancock: 3k, 5 att (.600); 2 aces; 11 digs; 34 assists I’m confused as to how we look at these hitting percentages and then simultaneously praise Hancock for what a good job she did setting the offense. I completely agree. A setter isn't rated on how pretty or hittable her sets are but whether they score points. And that usually happens when the ball gets there before the second blocker does. Thus the fast tempo (lower, quicker sets) that Poulter and Carlini put up (and which, yes, put the pressure on the hitters to deal with an uncomfortably low or quick ball) are accomplishing that objective. Pretty, soft, comfortable sets tend to get blocked at this level, no matter how hard you hit them because there was enough time for a blocking wall to get set up. Hancock played very well overall and is a real weapon as a server, but if we can only take two setters, my vote goes to Carlini and Poulter. They're like the UPS and the FedEx of VB setters...when the ball absolutely positively has to get there before the second blocker shows up. |
|
|
|
Post by Reach on Jun 1, 2021 17:57:21 GMT -5
I only tuned in second set and what I saw of Hancock is what I always see of Hancock. She's good but not great. Do we have a “great” setter? We have two. Prob top 5 in the world at this point. |
|
