|
Post by staticb on Sept 19, 2022 10:07:55 GMT -5
I pulled this over from another thread since the discussion fits better here. Assuming Nebraska goes to a 5-1 later in the season, I'm thinking Allick would be a better fit at M1. She seems much more comfortable (as compared to Hord) running the slide and is also able to attack nicely in front of the setter. With Hord at M2 her middle attacking would draw attention from the defense and help open up both pins for more one on one attacking opportunities in those rotations. I know Hord was playing M1 at the start of the season when Nebraska was in a 5-1, but I'm wondering if moving her to M2 would be a good tactical move? If we run a 5-1, I'm ok not having the slide, as long as we have Whitney hitting from the back row. It attacks the net at the same point and Whit can definitely do it.
|
|
|
Post by kidsker7 on Sept 19, 2022 10:28:10 GMT -5
Lovers of the 5-1, wake up and smell the coffee. Match after match hitting over 300 and a big block always at the net creating all kind of problems for opponents is not going to be ignored by this coaching staff. We have the personnel this year (and the next two years) to run it at a very high level and it keeps a lot of players involved on game day. We may have to switch back to 5-1 during some games as we near running out of subs, but coaches looking for 2 more points a game have found an answer that I doubt they will easily discard.
|
|
|
Post by bballnut90 on Sept 19, 2022 10:41:56 GMT -5
I pulled this over from another thread since the discussion fits better here. I think Cook eventually goes to a 5-1 and probably has Nicklin running the show if Orr is still in her head. Bench Mendelson, pin trio of Kubik/Lauenstein (who is a much needed terminal hitter)/Krause, Hord gets more involved in a 5-1 playing M1, and I think you have a really lethal team. I think they're most likely to win the B1G at this point considering how well they've done with so much inconsistency from the setter spot. Cook gets that figured out and I think they start to roll. Assuming Nebraska goes to a 5-1 later in the season, I'm thinking Allick would be a better fit at M1. She seems much more comfortable (as compared to Hord) running the slide and is also able to attack nicely in front of the setter. With Hord at M2 her middle attacking would draw attention from the defense and help open up both pins for more one on one attacking opportunities in those rotations. I know Hord was playing M1 at the start of the season when Nebraska was in a 5-1, but I'm wondering if moving her to M2 would be a good tactical move? That's a good observation--Allick makes more sense if she runs a smoother slide. Hord is just such a dominant hitter I was thinking she'd get more looks and probably has a decent slide too even if we haven't seen it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2022 10:54:38 GMT -5
I have a question and I wish to not be belittled about it lmao.....regarding any 6-2 other than the obvious problem that would occur if you ran out of subs, what would be the difference between having your setters sub for your RS and having them sub for your middles? Like I said, if you ran out of subs it's a problem but other than that is there any big difference? UCLA did this in 2016 I think
|
|
|
Post by bballnut90 on Sept 19, 2022 11:10:16 GMT -5
Lovers of the 5-1, wake up and smell the coffee. Match after match hitting over 300 and a big block always at the net creating all kind of problems for opponents is not going to be ignored by this coaching staff. We have the personnel this year (and the next two years) to run it at a very high level and it keeps a lot of players involved on game day. We may have to switch back to 5-1 during some games as we near running out of subs, but coaches looking for 2 more points a game have found an answer that I doubt they will easily discard. Nebraska had an efficient match vs Kentucky despite bad setting (hit .302) but hasn't hit nearly as well against other ranked foes. They've hit .120 vs Pepperdine, .244 vs. Creighton, and .166 vs. Stanford. On the year they're .265, a figure which likely drops in Big Ten play. Long story short, there's a lot of room for improvement considering how talented Nebraska's hitters are. Having the personnel to run a 6-2 doesn't mean you should run a 6-2. It's great to have depth and options, but if I'm a coach I'd rather have a higher percentage of swings going to middles or Lauenstein in a 5-1 rather than forcing a 6-2 so less efficient players like Mendelson/Batenhorst can get swings too. As far as second contact, setters almost always find a better rhythm in a 5-1 and the chemistry is just better with hitters hitting off of 1 setter. It's harder as a hitter (particularly middles) to hit off setters with different heights and setting tempos vs finding chemistry with one setter. I also think Nebraska has 2 really solid options for 5-1 setters. Orr is supposed to be the next great Nebraska setter and has the physical tools to be a 6 rotation player but is really in her head right now. Playing in a 5-1 forces her to focus on the next point and play through mistakes rather than being subbed out in the front row where she has time to overthink on the sidelines and let nerves build up again. If you're looking to peak by December and think Orr is the best option, I think it's worth playing through a few rough matches if there's a good chance she'll find her confidence and rhythm faster. I don't love her setting in a 6-2 since she isn't particularly good defensively and a big part of her value is her ability to attack in the front row and put up a great block. I don't see her as a strong 6-2 setter but think she's a better 5-1 option. If it doesn't work out with Orr this year, the other option is Nicklin Hames who ran a 5-1 for 4 years at Nebraska. Nicklin isn't a perfect setter but she's a heck of a backrow defender and gets middles involved, plus she's an excellent leader and floor general. You give up blocking on the right with Hames in the front row, but I think what you gain in more consistent setting and leadership offsets that. More over, looking at 6-2s historically, there has been one team in the last 30 years that's won a title in a 6-2 offense with 3 rotation backrow setters (2002 USC--worth noting, Stanford ran a true 6-2 in 1994 where Sharpley/Wendell both hit in the front row). It can get teams close to a title but rarely does it actually win you a championship.
|
|
|
Post by gibbyb1 on Sept 19, 2022 11:47:16 GMT -5
Lovers of the 5-1, wake up and smell the coffee. Match after match hitting over 300 and a big block always at the net creating all kind of problems for opponents is not going to be ignored by this coaching staff. We have the personnel this year (and the next two years) to run it at a very high level and it keeps a lot of players involved on game day. We may have to switch back to 5-1 during some games as we near running out of subs, but coaches looking for 2 more points a game have found an answer that I doubt they will easily discard. Nebraska had an efficient match vs Kentucky despite bad setting (hit .302) but hasn't hit nearly as well against other ranked foes. They've hit .120 vs Pepperdine, .244 vs. Creighton, and .166 vs. Stanford. On the year they're .265, a figure which likely drops in Big Ten play. Long story short, there's a lot of room for improvement considering how talented Nebraska's hitters are. Having the personnel to run a 6-2 doesn't mean you should run a 6-2. It's great to have depth and options, but if I'm a coach I'd rather have a higher percentage of swings going to middles or Lauenstein in a 5-1 rather than forcing a 6-2 so less efficient players like Mendelson/Batenhorst can get swings too. As far as second contact, setters almost always find a better rhythm in a 5-1 and the chemistry is just better with hitters hitting off of 1 setter. It's harder as a hitter (particularly middles) to hit off setters with different heights and setting tempos vs finding chemistry with one setter. I also think Nebraska has 2 really solid options for 5-1 setters. Orr is supposed to be the next great Nebraska setter and has the physical tools to be a 6 rotation player but is really in her head right now. Playing in a 5-1 forces her to focus on the next point and play through mistakes rather than being subbed out in the front row where she has time to overthink on the sidelines and let nerves build up again. If you're looking to peak by December and think Orr is the best option, I think it's worth playing through a few rough matches if there's a good chance she'll find her confidence and rhythm faster. I don't love her setting in a 6-2 since she isn't particularly good defensively and a big part of her value is her ability to attack in the front row and put up a great block. I don't see her as a strong 6-2 setter but think she's a better 5-1 option. If it doesn't work out with Orr this year, the other option is Nicklin Hames who ran a 5-1 for 4 years at Nebraska. Nicklin isn't a perfect setter but she's a heck of a backrow defender and gets middles involved, plus she's an excellent leader and floor general. You give up blocking on the right with Hames in the front row, but I think what you gain in more consistent setting and leadership offsets that. More over, looking at 6-2s historically, there has been one team in the last 30 years that's won a title in a 6-2 offense with 3 rotation backrow setters (2002 USC--worth noting, Stanford ran a true 6-2 in 1994 where Sharpley/Wendell both hit in the front row). It can get teams close to a title but rarely does it actually win you a championship. Injuries have played as big a role in what system they’re in as much as personnel has.
|
|
|
Post by kidsker7 on Sept 19, 2022 11:49:40 GMT -5
All of those statements about the historic advantages of the 5-1 and the fact that one team in 30 years has won the title are well known, but backward looking. The #s from Pepperdine and Stanford were lower than the average, but we have no idea how low they would have been had the 5-1 been run. I believe the hitting #s have been consistently 100 pts. higher than last year and I do not know her #s, but it seems like Madi has had to carry less of the load. As a coach, you have to recognize what is reality today. If you have to think and act outside of the box, so be it. JC has been good at adjusting for success.
|
|
|
Post by azsker on Sept 19, 2022 11:52:52 GMT -5
Nebraska had an efficient match vs Kentucky despite bad setting (hit .302) but hasn't hit nearly as well against other ranked foes. They've hit .120 vs Pepperdine, .244 vs. Creighton, and .166 vs. Stanford. On the year they're .265, a figure which likely drops in Big Ten play. Long story short, there's a lot of room for improvement considering how talented Nebraska's hitters are. Having the personnel to run a 6-2 doesn't mean you should run a 6-2. It's great to have depth and options, but if I'm a coach I'd rather have a higher percentage of swings going to middles or Lauenstein in a 5-1 rather than forcing a 6-2 so less efficient players like Mendelson/Batenhorst can get swings too. As far as second contact, setters almost always find a better rhythm in a 5-1 and the chemistry is just better with hitters hitting off of 1 setter. It's harder as a hitter (particularly middles) to hit off setters with different heights and setting tempos vs finding chemistry with one setter. I also think Nebraska has 2 really solid options for 5-1 setters. Orr is supposed to be the next great Nebraska setter and has the physical tools to be a 6 rotation player but is really in her head right now. Playing in a 5-1 forces her to focus on the next point and play through mistakes rather than being subbed out in the front row where she has time to overthink on the sidelines and let nerves build up again. If you're looking to peak by December and think Orr is the best option, I think it's worth playing through a few rough matches if there's a good chance she'll find her confidence and rhythm faster. I don't love her setting in a 6-2 since she isn't particularly good defensively and a big part of her value is her ability to attack in the front row and put up a great block. I don't see her as a strong 6-2 setter but think she's a better 5-1 option. If it doesn't work out with Orr this year, the other option is Nicklin Hames who ran a 5-1 for 4 years at Nebraska. Nicklin isn't a perfect setter but she's a heck of a backrow defender and gets middles involved, plus she's an excellent leader and floor general. You give up blocking on the right with Hames in the front row, but I think what you gain in more consistent setting and leadership offsets that. More over, looking at 6-2s historically, there has been one team in the last 30 years that's won a title in a 6-2 offense with 3 rotation backrow setters (2002 USC--worth noting, Stanford ran a true 6-2 in 1994 where Sharpley/Wendell both hit in the front row). It can get teams close to a title but rarely does it actually win you a championship. Injuries have played as big a role in what system they’re in as much as personnel has. How have injuries changed the system? They were in a 6-2 with Batenhorst and Hames healthy. Now that they're out with injuries-they're still in a 6-2. What does this mean?
|
|
|
Post by big10+4 fan on Sept 19, 2022 13:03:22 GMT -5
I have a question and I wish to not be belittled about it lmao.....regarding any 6-2 other than the obvious problem that would occur if you ran out of subs, what would be the difference between having your setters sub for your RS and having them sub for your middles? Like I said, if you ran out of subs it's a problem but other than that is there any big difference? UCLA did this in 2016 I think I think Michigan State did in 2017 also iirc
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2022 13:04:02 GMT -5
UCLA did this in 2016 I think I think Michigan State did in 2017 also iirc nope. Minarik ran a 5-1. That was one of my fave teams ever
|
|
|
Post by Kingsley on Sept 19, 2022 13:05:54 GMT -5
I have a question and I wish to not be belittled about it lmao.....regarding any 6-2 other than the obvious problem that would occur if you ran out of subs, what would be the difference between having your setters sub for your RS and having them sub for your middles? Like I said, if you ran out of subs it's a problem but other than that is there any big difference? UCLA did this in 2016 I think Shoutout to libero-less 2019 Hawaii for the few weeks they had Jolie Rasmussen
|
|
|
Post by big10+4 fan on Sept 19, 2022 13:06:35 GMT -5
I think Michigan State did in 2017 also iirc nope. Minarik ran a 5-1. That was one of my fave teams ever Maybe it was the years prior with Kelsay (spelling) and the other one I can't remember lol.
|
|
|
Post by bballnut90 on Sept 19, 2022 13:08:54 GMT -5
All of those statements about the historic advantages of the 5-1 and the fact that one team in 30 years has won the title are well known, but backward looking. The #s from Pepperdine and Stanford were lower than the average, but we have no idea how low they would have been had the 5-1 been run. I believe the hitting #s have been consistently 100 pts. higher than last year and I do not know her #s, but it seems like Madi has had to carry less of the load. As a coach, you have to recognize what is reality today. If you have to think and act outside of the box, so be it. JC has been good at adjusting for success. Disagree with 6-2s not winning titles being backward looking, you need to have some examples of success and there just aren't any aside from 2002 USC who was in their 3rd year of having the same setting duo to workout any flaws. 6-2s have been popular for a long time and we've frequently seen top programs utilize them (including Nebraska, Penn State, Texas, and Stanford) but they've never been able to win it all in that system. History says they just don't work as well and if you ask any player, they almost always prefer playing in a 5-1. Worth noting, Nebraska actually did run a 5-1 vs. Pepperdine, Orr set a really poor match though. If we go match by match you have: Texas A&M Corpus Christi, hit .388 with Orr in a 5-1 Tulsa, hit .318 with Evans in a 5-1 Pepperdine, hit .120 with Orr in a 5-1 LMU, hit .362 with Hames/Evans in a 6-2 Ole miss, hit .330 with all 3 setters getting some action in a 6-2 Creighton, hit .244 with Hames/Evans in a 6-2 Long Beach, hit .283 with Hames/Evans in a 6-2 Stanford, hit .166 with a Hames/Evans 6-2, Orr got some looks Kentucky, hit .302 with Orr/Evans in a 6-2 Too limited a sample size to draw any meaningful conclusions, but basically they've mostly hit well against cupcakes and hit for low percentages against better teams, sans Kentucky where the setting was really bad but they somehow hit over .300. In regards to Kubik, she's getting 8.6 swings per set compared to 10.1 last year so you're right in that her workload is less. I think that's more a function of having better pins and specificially having Lauenstein take on a bigger role rather than it being 6-2 related. Lauenstein looks like an elite level attacker which is someone Nebraska hasn't had since Foecke. Nebraska has effectively traded out a pair of .150 hitting pins (Sun/Batenhorst) for Whitney who is hitting over .300 so far. Huge upgrade and the biggest reason why Nebraska's hitting percentage is higher right now IMO. At any rate, time will tell and we'll see how the season pans out for the Huskers. So much potential if they can just set their hitters properly.
|
|
|
Post by kidsker7 on Sept 19, 2022 13:31:55 GMT -5
Agree with almost everything that you write, but I feel the difference when I watch the matches. I do not dread the pass to the pin against a sub 6' setter, I see many more attack options as the setter is receiving the pass and there are more 1 on 1's and the other team's middle starting late to the double team. Whit has been great, but Krause hit for high numbers, and was a blocking force at the end of last year with Nick setting from back row. I think that the setter in the front row looked o.k. because you had Stivrens being so very good on the slide. Maggie and Bekka showed an even bigger headache for defenses with the pin to middle and middle slide combination against Kentucky. You know that we are going to see that using Whit and Hord.
|
|
|
Post by tablealgebra on Sept 19, 2022 13:39:33 GMT -5
I have a question and I wish to not be belittled about it lmao.....regarding any 6-2 other than the obvious problem that would occur if you ran out of subs, what would be the difference between having your setters sub for your RS and having them sub for your middles? Like I said, if you ran out of subs it's a problem but other than that is there any big difference? UCLA did this in 2016 I think I wonder what the passing formations looked like. I assume you have the libero sub for your RS hitters instead and so it's still the two OH's and L passing, but beyond that I can't really visualize it.
|
|