trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2023, 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 31,467 
|
Post by trojansc on Aug 2, 2021 16:57:17 GMT -5
the commitment to ignorance is honestly impressive
|
|
|
|
Post by maplespear on Aug 2, 2021 17:06:55 GMT -5
Had a day to think about this match. The momentum change (set 2 score approx. 7-4 Italy) was when Larson scored off a tip (prior play was Italy tipping on us.) This action led to another successful tip from USA from MBH. USA's confidence kept getting stronger as the match progressed, which would put a lot of stress on Egonu to delivery. People say, Egonu had a bad match, she wasn't feeling well, etc. I think it's USA pressure that made her distressed and not play well.
|
|
|
|
Post by gibbyb1 on Aug 2, 2021 17:08:32 GMT -5
It is? I asked a straight forward question. Bc she can actually score….. she’s a good server and blocker as well. She seems to have a great on court energy and presence and because ya know the USA would have someone other than a DS To sub in for MBH when she can’t hit above 200 Are you saying Bartsch can’t score? At one point was SWP any higher on depth chart than 5th behind Larson, Bartsch, Hill, and Robinson? I like SWP, I think she has a future, but I don’t think she was really ever even considered to be among top 3 in her position for a reason. Regardless of what you or I think we know we didn’t observe training block, and the only competition we got to see of NT Bartsch wasn’t just better than SWP, she was better than everyone. I just think it’s an extraordinary assumption that a player not chosen would automatically have been better than someone who literally went off in the biggest international event two weeks prior who also has more experience. |
|
|
|
Post by gibbyb1 on Aug 2, 2021 17:10:31 GMT -5
The assumption that because a player is struggling a player not named to team would be doing better isn’t a smart one. no one is saying that. They're saying its better to have options. They dont have that right now. Ha, I get that, but you are limited to those options by roster size. They also do have an option, and it’s a player also chosen ahead of SWP, who has had a better NT career than SWP. I’m betting SWP wasn’t event the next option after the three chosen. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2021 17:10:58 GMT -5
Bc she can actually score….. she’s a good server and blocker as well. She seems to have a great on court energy and presence and because ya know the USA would have someone other than a DS To sub in for MBH when she can’t hit above 200 Are you saying Bartsch can’t score? At one point was SWP any higher on depth chart than 5th behind Larson, Bartsch, Hill, and Robinson? I like SWP, I think she has a future, but I don’t think she was really ever even considered to be among top 3 in her position for a reason. Regardless of what you or I think we know we didn’t observe training block, and the only competition we got to see of NT Bartsch wasn’t just better than SWP, she was better than everyone. I just think it’s an extraordinary assumption that a player not chosen would automatically have been better than someone who literally went off in the biggest international event two weeks prior who also has more experience. I’m not saying to have cut MBH for Sarah. I’m saying because they didn’t take Sarah they have no option to back up MBH. How hard is that for you to understand. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2021 17:12:23 GMT -5
no one is saying that. They're saying its better to have options. They dont have that right now. Ha, I get that, but you are limited to those options by roster size. They also do have an option, and it’s a player also chosen ahead of SWP, who has had a better NT career than SWP. I’m betting SWP wasn’t event the next option after the three chosen. who? Kelsey? She's not an attacker. Hill? KK has shown he doesn't want to use her as an attacker. Neither of those players can hit an OOS ball near as well as SWP. That's what the USA needs options for. |
|
|
|
Post by SportyBucky on Aug 2, 2021 17:15:19 GMT -5
Well, that is not entirely true but close enough. Sets outside by Poulter were pretty good. BICs great. Middle...eh. Different issues than Hancock. To me and what I've noticed... Poulter's sets to the OH were nice. Problem being is that she set the OH so much that it's easier for the blockers to predict and get a better formed wall up. Where as Hancock (small sample size I realize) distributed better among the different hitters. So while she may not have had as great of sets to the OH, the block wasn't as formed. And I wouldn't say Hancock's OH sets were bad either, outside of a few. I'd be curious to see the hitters hitting percentages between the two setters. So you'll take worse placement for middle production, it sounds like |
|
|
|
Post by jwvolley on Aug 2, 2021 17:22:15 GMT -5
"In the age of information, ignorance is a choice"
|
|
|
|
Post by volleyjeep on Aug 2, 2021 17:34:23 GMT -5
Ok. I found the box score, and as long as I entered everything correctly I get these hitting stats. If someone else posted this and I didn't see it, I apologize. I've been curious about a few things and I did have one thing I wondered about jump out at me. I pulled the data from the box score at this link: en.volleyballworld.com/volleyball/competitions/olympics-2020/schedule/11407/#1Foluke and Washington had the exact same amount of hitting attempts between Sets 1/2 and 4/5. Though set 5 is shorter. But basically Foluke went 2-2-5 (kills-errors-attempts) in first two sets and 2-0-5 in last two. Washington went 3-0-6 in first two and 2-1-6 in last two. Though I think somewhere in there one attempt/kill was from an overpass. I could have sworn that Hancock set the middles more. Egonu vs MBH below: Egonu Kills Err Att Hit % Kill % Err % Set 1 9 2 17 0.412 0.529 0.118 Set 2 3 5 9 -0.222 0.333 0.556 Set 3 10 3 16 0.438 0.625 0.188 Set 4 1 4 11 -0.273 0.091 0.364 Set 5 4 1 9 0.333 0.444 0.111 27 15 62 0.194 0.435 0.242 MBH Kills Err Att Hit % Kill % Err % Set 1 3 2 10 0.100 0.300 0.200 Set 2 3 0 5 0.600 0.600 0.000 Set 3 2 0 9 0.222 0.222 0.000 Set 4 3 3 10 0.000 0.300 0.300 Set 5 2 3 6 -0.167 0.333 0.500 13 8 40 0.125 0.325 0.200 As far as team stats... You can see down below. USA Kills Err Att Hit % Kill % Err % Set 1 13 8 42 0.119 0.310 0.190 Set 2 13 8 18 0.278 0.722 0.444 Set 3 13 7 35 0.171 0.371 0.200 Set 4 12 5 32 0.219 0.375 0.156 Set 5 8 3 20 0.250 0.400 0.150 59 31 147 0.190 0.401 0.211 Italy Kills Err Att Hit % Kill % Err % Set 1 14 3 32 0.344 0.438 0.094 Set 2 12 11 31 0.032 0.387 0.355 Set 3 19 7 36 0.333 0.528 0.194 Set 4 8 9 28 -0.036 0.286 0.321 Set 5 7 3 19 0.211 0.368 0.158 60 33 146 0.185 0.411 0.226 Looks like it didn't keep the nice formatting when I posted it. Ugh. |
|
|
|
Post by volleyjeep on Aug 2, 2021 17:42:12 GMT -5
To me and what I've noticed... Poulter's sets to the OH were nice. Problem being is that she set the OH so much that it's easier for the blockers to predict and get a better formed wall up. Where as Hancock (small sample size I realize) distributed better among the different hitters. So while she may not have had as great of sets to the OH, the block wasn't as formed. And I wouldn't say Hancock's OH sets were bad either, outside of a few. I'd be curious to see the hitters hitting percentages between the two setters. So you'll take worse placement for middle production, it sounds like From what I can see, US had hitting/kill/err percentages in sets 1 and 2 of .167/.433/.267. In sets 4 and 5 they had .231/.385/.154. Take it for what you will. But seems like they were more efficient with Hancock setting, and that's with MBH hitting negative in set 5. |
|
|
|
Post by donut on Aug 2, 2021 17:57:39 GMT -5
Gibby’s use of strawmen today is next level.
Even for gibby.
|
|
|
|
Post by gibbyb1 on Aug 2, 2021 18:06:27 GMT -5
Ha, I get that, but you are limited to those options by roster size. They also do have an option, and it’s a player also chosen ahead of SWP, who has had a better NT career than SWP. I’m betting SWP wasn’t event the next option after the three chosen. who? Kelsey? She's not an attacker. Hill? KK has shown he doesn't want to use her as an attacker. Neither of those players can hit an OOS ball near as well as SWP. That's what the USA needs options for. In what universe is Kelsey not n outside hitter you can only roster twelve players you can’t roster six subs for every possible scenario |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2021 18:10:23 GMT -5
who? Kelsey? She's not an attacker. Hill? KK has shown he doesn't want to use her as an attacker. Neither of those players can hit an OOS ball near as well as SWP. That's what the USA needs options for. In what universe is Kelsey not n outside hitter you can only roster twelve players you can’t roster six subs for every possible scenario I didn’t say she’s not an outside hitter. Please keep up. It’s sad. I said she’s not an attacker. MBH is an attacker. How many times do you need to be shown that a Kelsey-Larson pairing doesn’t work SWP is the attacking replacement for MBH. None of the other options are. I would drop Hill. |
|
|
|
Post by ballervolley on Aug 2, 2021 18:27:07 GMT -5
Questionable? She trapped her hitters, she misconnected with hitters.,she Set the ball too short, her hitters had to tip a lot of shots, we found Carlinis burner account lmao so she didn't do any of this? |
|
|
|
Post by ballervolley on Aug 2, 2021 18:28:59 GMT -5
Questionable? She trapped her hitters, she misconnected with hitters.,she Set the ball too short, her hitters had to tip a lot of shots, No worse than what Poulter was doing. poulter did none of this from what i saw. |
|
