|
Post by SportyBucky on Aug 4, 2022 7:39:07 GMT -5
Totally lose the slide and OH see more double blocks,well-formed blocks. So in the typical 5-1 set with Hilley last year there were usually 3 occasionally 4 options for attack correct? Doesn't he 6-2 give them more potential attackers on any given play? I would think that is tempting for that aspect alone. Plus you don't know where the set is coming from right? I'm not real solid on the 6-2 rotation and how it cycles through. The setter always sets from the 7 position along the net, assuming the pass makes it there. You have 4 attackers at all times with a 6-2, unless you use subs for your outsides, who become the 4th attacker in the back row. They'd be passing with the front row outside and the libero. There are variations but that's the likely scenario.
|
|
|
Post by SportyBucky on Aug 4, 2022 7:41:13 GMT -5
Totally lose the slide and OH see more double blocks,well-formed blocks. I don't think we would totally lose the slide. We saw rotations last year when Smrek was the Opp sharing front row with Rettke or Robinson. They'd run the middle on the slide with Smrek on the 1, while the block had to respect Smrek. The opposing hypothetical is that the middle and OH could overload the block in front of the setter, leaving a one-on-one behind the setter. All that said, I still don't care for the idea. Yes, that is true, but it's incredibly unique in running a 6-2. Most teams aren't utilizing a RS as a middle to run the quick in front of the setter.
|
|
|
Post by SportyBucky on Aug 4, 2022 7:43:47 GMT -5
Speaking for rob here, there is also the option of the 5-2 where Hammill sets when in front row, and Ashburn in back row. It has the same fundamental problem as the 6-2 re connections between setters and hitters. The main UW specific arguments for a 5-2, as I understand it, is that the Smrek/Demps sub can still happen, allowing Demps to hit out of the BR. Hammill may be a better blocker than Demps as well. Of course, the 5-1 works really well for the badgers, or at least it did with Rettke and Hilley. There is that option. To justify it in my head, Ashburn would have to be the better location setter by a couple notches and Hammill would have to be a better blocker than Ashburn and, ostensibly, Demps. I have my doubts on both. I also have my doubts that Hammill is actually 6'2". Maybe it's because she's around a bunch of sequoias all the time, but I side-eye that roster height hard. Demps has not shown herself to be a solid blocker. Hammill is taller than Hilley. She may not have the vertical, but she's taller. That said, what makes you think Ashburn's location is that of Hammill? Having seen a few standing OOS sets and spring matches from Ashburn, I'm not a huge fan of her location and tempo.
|
|
|
Post by mnbadger on Aug 4, 2022 7:57:46 GMT -5
In the 6-2, the setters play opposite one another. What you see more often in the college game is a setter (S1) subbing out for a hitter (R2) when S1 is about to rotate to the front row. Usually, at the same time, a hitter (R1) that's about to rotate to the back row out for an incoming setter (S2). It keeps a setter in the back row and preserves three front row hitting options. The only exception at the college level that I saw for position play was in 2004, Minnesota ran a 6-2 where both Bowman and Taatjes were the setters and stayed in the entire match, setting when back row and hitting when in front. You'll infrequently see it implemented on a delayed double-sub, when the hitter might have a great serve in combination with a monstrous block up at net, thus there would be half a rotation when there's no setter on the floor. Washington used that kind of sub pattern when Nogueras and Beals were the setters, but Munoz played 3.5 rotations to serve. For Wisconsin, the hitting options could be as many as 4 on a perfect pass: 3 in the front row, and an OH on the pipe or whatever back row patterns they spin up. It will depend on how subs are used and what wins us the most points. Depending on which OHs see the floor, there is the potential to run both OHs as 6-rotation left sides. If Franklin is good enough in passing and floor defense and if Orzol is healed up enough, there's capacity for the 4 option offense, which would be wild. If a hitter (likely Demps) can keep her serve potency with Smrek and one of our 40 middles, WI could also see the delayed double-sub. All that said, I don't particularly like the idea of a 6-2 for WI. For it to flow really well, particularly in system, the hitters need chemistry with both setters and the setters need to be able to put up really similar balls and locations. The eye test from spring matches seemed like Ashburn and Hammill set different balls. Release points alone felt pretty different. It's also a recipe for almost guaranteed burns on tight-to-the-net passes; the setter is always back row. I'm skeptical of this being viable, but have an open mind to it. Just not enough data as a fan. I’m really enjoying the discussion of how two-setter systems work, and learning a lot. Thanks! That said, it’s not at all clear to me what a half rotation would be. Any hints for me? And if it’s information that’s pretty available, a simple STFW is fine too. 😊 The "half rotations" are when you're serving as half, and when you're receiving as the other half. Not sure if that's a technically true explanation, but it makes sense. To see it clearly, you can look up Washington vs Nebraska in the NCAA tournament in 2012 on youtube. Washington got shellacked, but you'll see the "half rotations" when the Huskies have no setter on the floor.
|
|
|
Post by mnbadger on Aug 4, 2022 7:59:23 GMT -5
I don't think we would totally lose the slide. We saw rotations last year when Smrek was the Opp sharing front row with Rettke or Robinson. They'd run the middle on the slide with Smrek on the 1, while the block had to respect Smrek. The opposing hypothetical is that the middle and OH could overload the block in front of the setter, leaving a one-on-one behind the setter. All that said, I still don't care for the idea. Yes, that is true, but it's incredibly unique in running a 6-2. Most teams aren't utilizing a RS as a middle to run the quick in front of the setter. Oh for sure. We've now had a couple years where our opposite was a converted middle and we're likely in for another.
|
|
|
Post by robtearle on Aug 4, 2022 8:01:50 GMT -5
In the 6-2, the setters play opposite one another. What you see more often in the college game is a setter (S1) subbing out for a hitter (R2) when S1 is about to rotate to the front row. Usually, at the same time, a hitter (R1) that's about to rotate to the back row out for an incoming setter (S2). It keeps a setter in the back row and preserves three front row hitting options. The only exception at the college level that I saw for position play was in 2004, Minnesota ran a 6-2 where both Bowman and Taatjes were the setters and stayed in the entire match, setting when back row and hitting when in front. You'll infrequently see it implemented on a delayed double-sub, when the hitter might have a great serve in combination with a monstrous block up at net, thus there would be half a rotation when there's no setter on the floor. Washington used that kind of sub pattern when Nogueras and Beals were the setters, but Munoz played 3.5 rotations to serve. For Wisconsin, the hitting options could be as many as 4 on a perfect pass: 3 in the front row, and an OH on the pipe or whatever back row patterns they spin up. It will depend on how subs are used and what wins us the most points. Depending on which OHs see the floor, there is the potential to run both OHs as 6-rotation left sides. If Franklin is good enough in passing and floor defense and if Orzol is healed up enough, there's capacity for the 4 option offense, which would be wild. If a hitter (likely Demps) can keep her serve potency with Smrek and one of our 40 middles, WI could also see the delayed double-sub. All that said, I don't particularly like the idea of a 6-2 for WI. For it to flow really well, particularly in system, the hitters need chemistry with both setters and the setters need to be able to put up really similar balls and locations. The eye test from spring matches seemed like Ashburn and Hammill set different balls. Release points alone felt pretty different. It's also a recipe for almost guaranteed burns on tight-to-the-net passes; the setter is always back row. I'm skeptical of this being viable, but have an open mind to it. Just not enough data as a fan. I’m really enjoying the discussion of how two-setter systems work, and learning a lot. Thanks! That said, it’s not at all clear to me what a half rotation would be. Any hints for me? And if it’s information that’s pretty available, a simple STFW is fine too. 😊 A team is in a particular rotational position for a serving turn and a serve-receiver turn, until they win the serve back. So a half-rotation refers to either the serving half or the receiving half of that particular rotational position. Eg. Wisconsin wins the serve, Orzol rotates back to be the server, and then stsys there for serve-receive, until Wisconsin wins back the serve, when she rotates to middle-back. Her serve and then her serve-receive are the two halfs of that rotation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2022 8:12:30 GMT -5
There is that option. To justify it in my head, Ashburn would have to be the better location setter by a couple notches and Hammill would have to be a better blocker than Ashburn and, ostensibly, Demps. I have my doubts on both. I also have my doubts that Hammill is actually 6'2". Maybe it's because she's around a bunch of sequoias all the time, but I side-eye that roster height hard. Demps has not shown herself to be a solid blocker. Hammill is taller than Hilley. She may not have the vertical, but she's taller. That said, what makes you think Ashburn's location is that of Hammill? Having seen a few standing OOS sets and spring matches from Ashburn, I'm not a huge fan of her location and tempo. Were you able to attend any of the spring games? I was curious as to Demps progress in the blocking component? Would really open some big possibilities up with our offense when/if Jade displays the necessary improvements.
|
|
|
Post by mnbadger on Aug 4, 2022 8:23:16 GMT -5
In the 6-2, the setters play opposite one another. What you see more often in the college game is a setter (S1) subbing out for a hitter (R2) when S1 is about to rotate to the front row. Usually, at the same time, a hitter (R1) that's about to rotate to the back row out for an incoming setter (S2). It keeps a setter in the back row and preserves three front row hitting options. The only exception at the college level that I saw for position play was in 2004, Minnesota ran a 6-2 where both Bowman and Taatjes were the setters and stayed in the entire match, setting when back row and hitting when in front. You'll infrequently see it implemented on a delayed double-sub, when the hitter might have a great serve in combination with a monstrous block up at net, thus there would be half a rotation when there's no setter on the floor. Washington used that kind of sub pattern when Nogueras and Beals were the setters, but Munoz played 3.5 rotations to serve. For Wisconsin, the hitting options could be as many as 4 on a perfect pass: 3 in the front row, and an OH on the pipe or whatever back row patterns they spin up. It will depend on how subs are used and what wins us the most points. Depending on which OHs see the floor, there is the potential to run both OHs as 6-rotation left sides. If Franklin is good enough in passing and floor defense and if Orzol is healed up enough, there's capacity for the 4 option offense, which would be wild. If a hitter (likely Demps) can keep her serve potency with Smrek and one of our 40 middles, WI could also see the delayed double-sub. All that said, I don't particularly like the idea of a 6-2 for WI. For it to flow really well, particularly in system, the hitters need chemistry with both setters and the setters need to be able to put up really similar balls and locations. The eye test from spring matches seemed like Ashburn and Hammill set different balls. Release points alone felt pretty different. It's also a recipe for almost guaranteed burns on tight-to-the-net passes; the setter is always back row. I'm skeptical of this being viable, but have an open mind to it. Just not enough data as a fan. For the record, Wisconsin ran a “pure” 6-2 in 2011. Both Janelle Gabrielsen and Courtney Thomas played 6 rotations, setting in back and hitting in front. Those were the wilderness years, sure, but I did love that particular offense because it made incredible use of the raw talent we had in our setter/hitters. Wilderness years indeed. I was out west, didn't have BTN, and the Badgers were kinda..........
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Aug 4, 2022 9:11:04 GMT -5
Yes, that is true, but it's incredibly unique in running a 6-2. Most teams aren't utilizing a RS as a middle to run the quick in front of the setter. Oh for sure. We've now had a couple years where our opposite was a converted middle and we're likely in for another. Oddly, this trend actually started with Duello in 2017. She was just more comfortable and more effective hitting out of the middle than on the pin. But you’re right, since Duello left we’ve had converted middles playing RS.
|
|
|
Post by ndodge on Aug 4, 2022 12:37:45 GMT -5
All this imagining of players and positions is making me want to see this 2022 team in live action even more
|
|
|
Post by buckyupbuttercup on Aug 4, 2022 13:25:43 GMT -5
All this imagining of players and positions is making me want to see this 2022 team in live action even more Just two weeks and change away! If Bamschrieber gets squared away, to me, everything looks 'set up' for high probability of success with the one glaring question of how setter will pan out. We've been spoiled for nine years. If nothing else, it should be interesting to watch it play out. On the recruiting front, I had us down for a setter and middle. We got a great setter right out of the gate, and Bamchrieber was a great surprise addition for this year(assuming things get taken care of), but, I'm greedy, where's our middle?
|
|
|
Post by BadgerAce42 on Aug 4, 2022 16:45:01 GMT -5
All this imagining of players and positions is making me want to see this 2022 team in live action even more Just two weeks and change away! If Bamschrieber gets squared away, to me, everything looks 'set up' for high probability of success with the one glaring question of how setter will pan out. We've been spoiled for nine years. If nothing else, it should be interesting to watch it play out. On the recruiting front, I had us down for a setter and middle. We got a great setter right out of the gate, and Bamchrieber was a great surprise addition for this year(assuming things get taken care of), but, I'm greedy, where's our middle? Committed to NEB, lol
|
|
|
Post by tablealgebra on Aug 4, 2022 18:37:06 GMT -5
I've been a pretty vocal proponent of them switching to a 5-1, both publicly and privately yes they've done well running it, and if you have the arms for it it's a good system. but when's the last time a team running a 6-2 won the championship? especially for a team that wants to be as middle heavy as Wisconsin, I just don't think it's going to be as successful as I'd like to see Totally lose the slide and OH see more double blocks,well-formed blocks. Adding an additional hitter in Rotations 4 through 6 (by subbing in a second setter into the back row and a new RS into the front row) is not going to make the OH see better blocks. Exactly the opposite, in fact. Besides, nothing stops you from running the slide with three front-row attackers - the Badgers certainly did it last year. It's just no longer necessary. The only thing in a 6-2 that would make the OH see better blocks is if you became so much worse defensively that you were reduced to setting high balls to the OH in transition.
|
|
|
Post by robtearle on Aug 4, 2022 23:35:15 GMT -5
Just two weeks and change away! If Bamschrieber gets squared away, to me, everything looks 'set up' for high probability of success with the one glaring question of how setter will pan out. We've been spoiled for nine years. If nothing else, it should be interesting to watch it play out. On the recruiting front, I had us down for a setter and middle. We got a great setter right out of the gate, and Bamchrieber was a great surprise addition for this year(assuming things get taken care of), but, I'm greedy, where's our middle? Committed to NEB, lol Crawford has three years eligibility remaining, as does Smrek, as does Robinson. The Badgers are OK at middle for a while.
|
|
|
Post by buckyupbuttercup on Aug 5, 2022 6:41:37 GMT -5
Crawford has three years eligibility remaining, as does Smrek, as does Robinson. The Badgers are OK at middle for a while. They certainly are fine at middle for a while. Also, currently on the outside, Orzol, Demps and Franklin have 3 years and Wrobel has 4. However, in 2024 one of Robinson or Smrek is playing opp and there is no middle depth. There is always the transfer market, but it would be nice to see a good mix with some young developmental depth. I'll actually be happy with any 2024 top tier hitter commit, middle or outside.
|
|