|
|
Post by Badger Alum on Sept 12, 2022 14:53:04 GMT -5
I haven't charted their defense at all, but from the eye test, Hammil seems significantly weaker on defense. Just doesn't seem to move as well coverage wise vs Izzy and I don't think I've seen any D plays out of Hammil this year that would have saved a point vs any other player back there. Though its not like Izzy or Hilley were special on back row defense either. This was an area where Carlini truly was something different (unfair to compare any setter to Carlini) as she is an elite defensive setter. Hames at Nebraska is also a great example as she might give up points at blocking but she for sure saves points with her defense in the backrow. Others have brought up that the serving difference may be the biggest factor between Izzy and Hammil point diff as Izzy, GG, and Ozrol all serve during Izzy's rotations and have done well so far this year. On the season, Hammill has 2.1 digs per set, while Ashburn has 1.52. So while there’s a lot to be said for the eye test, in terms of floor coverage, etc., by the numbers Hammill is doing a lot more digging. You might be right about that, but those stats can be deceiving. Some of it has to do with OOS balls across the net. They want to put them on the setter whenever possible and that will artificially inflate the # of digs. I'm not saying that is the case here, but I know from past experience depending on the OOS balls some defensive stats can be inflated for any/all setters. I think in the past this was especially true for the Badgers because teams wanted to get us to have Carlini/Hilley take first contact for obvious reasons. Not just because we had good setters, but our 2nd contacts by non-setters was not a strength of ours. |
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Sept 12, 2022 15:06:10 GMT -5
Those stats actually correspond to what I have seen from the two setters so far this season. With the added responsibility, Ashburn's defense has been a little less remarkable than it sometimes has been in past years. She's always been good at laying out and picking up tips or deflections, but not as good about digging attacks aimed straight at her (I mean, not many are, but there are some). I haven't been seeing her getting to the tips as often this year, and when she does, getting the ball up high enough to play 2nd ball effectively. I imagine as the season progresses and she gets her feet under her more and more, that she will get back to her past form.
The point about GGs second touch is a good one. She often produces hittable balls out of situations that in the past would feel like lost causes, and she does it entirely bump setting. It's a look that is a little hard to get used to - very different from past badger offenses. That said, it would be better if the digs and passes were a little more under control so the badgers wouldn't have to depend on that and instead work a faster transition for better opportunities. I really want to see that part of the game develop more.
|
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Sept 12, 2022 15:18:38 GMT -5
The thing that worries me so far is the team's dependence on lights-out serving and the block. It's a good thing to have, and you always have to provide serving pressure, but it is something that tends to ebb and flow between matches. Now and then you get a match where your best servers just error.
A little more consistency from the passing and setting, and a little bit more variety in offensive schemes would be nice to have as a more solid foundation.
|
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Sept 12, 2022 15:31:15 GMT -5
Speaking of GG
|
|
|
|
Post by nikkigsmith on Sept 12, 2022 16:31:38 GMT -5
Scores by setter by set (understanding that MJ was reportedly ill (?) during the day): Izzy on the court - 16-14, 21-14, 14-10; total 51-38 MJ on the court - 9-9, 7-12, 11-8; total 27-29 First off, thanks for doing this. Your stats confirm what my eyes where seeing. I have noticed from the 1st game that the team did better with Izzy on the court. Izzy also reminds me a lot of Sydney Hilley. |
|
|
|
Post by volleyball90 on Sept 12, 2022 16:37:15 GMT -5
First off, thanks for doing this. Your stats confirm what my eyes where seeing. I have noticed from the 1st game that the team did better with Izzy on the court. Izzy also reminds me a lot of Sydney Hilley. They did play together in high school, though Izzy was Hilley's setter. I do wish we got to see us run a 6-2 with Hilley and Izzy with Hilley hitting while in front row. She looked like a special hitter in Minnesota (and won POY as a hitter). However, I really don't see much similarities between the two other than both playing setter. |
|
|
|
Post by buckypete on Sept 12, 2022 16:53:41 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by wiscvball on Sept 12, 2022 17:03:04 GMT -5
The thing that worries me so far is the team's dependence on lights-out serving and the block. It's a good thing to have, and you always have to provide serving pressure, but it is something that tends to ebb and flow between matches. Now and then you get a match where your best servers just error. A little more consistency from the passing and setting, and a little bit more variety in offensive schemes would be nice to have as a more solid foundation. I 1000% agree with the offensive schemes point. The O has looked pretty vanilla so far. Lots of straight up right side and outside sets, little middle action, crossing plays or slides. If Smrek breaks back into the line-up soon, I'd love to see her primarily hit out of the middle and let Robinson play next to her to run more slides/right side attacks. If Smrek finds her groove, this team will be even more dangerous. I'm really happy with the pins efficiency thus far, given how much they have been relied on. Another point on GG's great second contact setting. That's even MORE important in a 6-2 where you always have a setter in the backrow who could be targeted by opposing attacks. I'd be curious to know what the efficiency %'s on her assist attempts looks like, to my eye, the hitters look pretty confident when they approach off of her bump setting. |
|
mad1
Sophomore
Posts: 220 
|
Post by mad1 on Sept 12, 2022 17:27:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Del Bocavista on Sept 12, 2022 17:28:05 GMT -5
I think Robinson is pretty much entrenched as a RS this season, but I agree Smrek and Robinson worked extremely well together last season next to each other at having Smrek hit primarily in the middle and block primarily on the right.
|
|
|
|
Post by wiscvball on Sept 12, 2022 17:34:03 GMT -5
I think Robinson is pretty much entrenched as a RS this season, but I agree Smrek and Robinson worked extremely well together last season next to each other at having Smrek hit primarily in the middle and block primarily on the right. Yeah, perhaps. I think a lot of "potential" issues with the lack of middle production are being covered up by strong left side play. If that lasts all season, great. If not, we may see adjustments. Shanel coming back can/will also influence things... I feel like the Gregorski serving for Franklin subs have been a sort of practice for the coaches in managing subs this season, in the event they want to use a DS later on. If they do, and the lefts fall off, you could see a reversion to a 5-1, which then also introduces the opportunity to bring Demps back as a backrow attacker. So many options and tough decisions. I'd also still love to see Wrobel a bit more - maybe against Rhode Island this coming weekend and rest a pin. |
|
|
|
Post by volleyball90 on Sept 12, 2022 17:38:18 GMT -5
I charted Izzy and MJ's defense for Marquette and Kentucky matches. Basically I just counted all balls attacked to their zone (if ball was deflected by block in aggressive way, I wouldn't count that as those are impossible to read), how many did they keep in play, and how many led to a Badger swing attempt. Also I marked if the play was a "wow" play that required significant effort or if it was a "wow" miss, a dig that would have required significant effort to get up.
Against Marquette. Izzy faced 14 attacks in her zone, she dug 10 (official stats say 9), 9 of them led to a Badger attack. Of her 4 misses, 2 would have required "wow" digs, and 1 was dug by GG who beat her to the ball. Also, Izzy had 2 block covers, one which was a "wow" play.
MJ had 18 attacks her way, dug 14 with a 12/2 attack/in play ratio, had 1 wow dig. Of her 4 misses, 1 required a wow dig, and 1 she was beat to ball by GG (GG is something).
Kentucky was a very different match in terms of hitting location by Kentucky.
Izzy had 8 attempts with 4 Digs, 1 in play, 1 wow dig. 2 of her misses required wow effort and she also had 1 block coverage
MJ had 5 attempts for 2 digs, both led to attacks, all of her 3 misses required wow efforts.
In summary, not really much difference in our 2 biggest wins. Though my earlier eye test would be that when Izzy misses on those "wow" plays, she just misses (for instance, against marquette she overplayed one pancake attempt and the ball hit her in head). While for MJ, it didn't seem like she really had any chance of making the play even though it was in her zone. But there does not appear to be any difference in defensive level of the 2 setters.
GG against Kentucky, wow. Just watching the match again and seeing how many rallies she kept going with insane touches and also how well she bump sets, she is special.
|
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Sept 12, 2022 17:40:54 GMT -5
Robinson's permanent move to the RS is one of the surprises of the year for me. I had not anticipated CC taking a MB spot. CC has become a real glue player. Strange for a middle.
Smrek struggles OOS, and we are in that situation a lot this year. Also, she seems hard to for Hammill to set. They are trying her with Izzy too now with little more success. I think she will get better - it's one of the things I'm looking forward to seeing. She found a role in the 5-1 with an excellent setter last year. Hammill or Ashburn will get comfortable with her. She just needs how to manage to use her high to be effective when she isn't getting good sets served on a plate where she can hit right over the block.
|
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Sept 12, 2022 17:45:52 GMT -5
. Though my earlier eye test would be that when Izzy misses on those "wow" plays, she just misses ... While for MJ, it didn't seem like she really had any chance of making the play even though it was in her zone. But there does not appear to be any difference in defensive level of the 2 setters. This was my sense. Hammill just doesn't look like she has the same range or spring in the first step. But interesting that their numbers aren't crazy different. |
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Sept 12, 2022 17:47:22 GMT -5
. Though my earlier eye test would be that when Izzy misses on those "wow" plays, she just misses ... While for MJ, it didn't seem like she really had any chance of making the play even though it was in her zone. But there does not appear to be any difference in defensive level of the 2 setters. This was my sense. Hammill just doesn't look like she has the same range or spring in the first step. But interesting that their numbers aren't crazy different. Also interesting how different Kentucky's strategy was to Marquette's. I noticed that during the match. |
|
