|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Dec 12, 2022 21:56:01 GMT -5
I always take those VM stats with a grain of salt. Sheffield was clearly coaching the passers to pass to a target that would have them averaging a 2 or 2.1 when the season started. As long as the BR attack was an option, that still meant they had three options as far as he was concerned. He was much more worried about overpasses than getting passes to the net because they had no way to defend them. In his pressers an in game comments, he really harped on those. Still, the badgers were not passing that well at all the last two matches. They got really tight when it mattered against good competition in a knockout tournament. The short arming on the aces really bugged me. GG scoots across the floor on defense and gets her hand to a ton of balls, but maybe needs to reign in that energy when she is passing. Still they beat one good team and then barely lost to the other really good team playing almost as poorly as they did at any time in the B1G season. IF they can get the passing stabilized and keep improving the setting they will be a real handful next year. Sheffield’s passing grades were fine when your setter is Carlini or Hilley, but they do not work when you have average setters. VM grades def more accurate. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I gather VMs grades are based on fixed rules about where the ball is passed and the trajectory of the pass. I would guess they don't adjust for setter ability - whether it is Carlini, Hilley or Hammill. Also, probably not dependent on setter choices, or what you think those setter choices are. Both of those would be way too hard to score objectively. To compare between teams they would have to use the same methodology. But they only give you an abstract score, and that has to be based on a standard methodology may not adjust for differences in passing targets between teams or systems. That means someone is assigning a value to a pass to a particular location. But maybe a coaching staff has a desire to keep the setter further off the net than is typical, or considers the back row as an attack option. The coach could tell his passers to hit a spot - say 8' off the net - which may not be scored as a perfect pass by VM, but would be considered a good pass by the coaching staff. Maybe having such a target could increase the chances that a pass would be scored not good if they missed the 8' target in one direction. That is what Sheffield was coaching his passers to pass to - a spot 8' off the net. We've seen numerous instances when they scored their passers differently than VM, when to my eye they passed well and the offense was running smoothly, but VM did not think so. Frankly I'd be more interested in knowing exactly where the ball was set, and the reliability of that location, rather than having a score that assigned a fixed value to a particular position. This is not to defend the passing this last two matches. It wasn't good enough. |
|
|
|
Post by badgerfanatic on Dec 12, 2022 23:26:42 GMT -5
I always take those VM stats with a grain of salt. Sheffield was clearly coaching the passers to pass to a target that would have them averaging a 2 or 2.1 when the season started. As long as the BR attack was an option, that still meant they had three options as far as he was concerned. He was much more worried about overpasses than getting passes to the net because they had no way to defend them. In his pressers an in game comments, he really harped on those. Does anyone else think our back row attacking dropped off somewhere in the last ~1/3 of the season? Or maybe the quality of BR attacks seemed better (less roll shots) earlier on? Also, if they were subbing in a serving specialist regularly for Franklin, why not sub in Demps... who could stay in for more rotations? Demps seemed more steady back row passing (maybe the stats say otherwise), obviously can hit from the back row as we saw in 2021, and has at least an average to above-average serve? |
|
|
|
Post by tablealgebra on Dec 13, 2022 0:11:47 GMT -5
That is what Sheffield was coaching his passers to pass to - a spot 8' off the net. We've seen numerous instances when they scored their passers differently than VM, when to my eye they passed well and the offense was running smoothly, but VM did not think so. Frankly I'd be more interested in knowing exactly where the ball was set, and the reliability of that location, rather than having a score that assigned a fixed value to a particular position. This is not to defend the passing this last two matches. It wasn't good enough. As I recall, what he said was if it's a tough serve, we want you aiming 8' off the net - we don't you trying too hard for a perfect pass and overpassing it, and we can run offense from 8'. It turns out that was a white lie because neither of our setters could effectively set middle from 8', but (and maybe Sheff knew this at the time) since we were a transition team, as long as we got a decent swing from the play we had good chances - perfect wasn't necessary. And as the year progressed, you saw the passers steadily get more confident at taking easier serves and diming them to about 4' off the net for the triple option, while playing tougher serves more consistently. My guess is that the internal numbers that the Badgers kept for passing (which are significantly higher than volleymetrics) took into account those instructions for tough serves. But I think the standard is the standard, and that objectively speaking a pass 8' off the net near the setter's mark is a 2. Which, if you pass a tough serve with a score of 2, you succeeded. Certainly we failed to hit that mark quite a few times against Pitt. |
|
|
|
Post by tablealgebra on Dec 13, 2022 0:19:46 GMT -5
I always take those VM stats with a grain of salt. Sheffield was clearly coaching the passers to pass to a target that would have them averaging a 2 or 2.1 when the season started. As long as the BR attack was an option, that still meant they had three options as far as he was concerned. He was much more worried about overpasses than getting passes to the net because they had no way to defend them. In his pressers an in game comments, he really harped on those. Does anyone else think our back row attacking dropped off somewhere in the last ~1/3 of the season? Or maybe the quality of BR attacks seemed better (less roll shots) earlier on? Also, if they were subbing in a serving specialist regularly for Franklin, why not sub in Demps... who could stay in for more rotations? Demps seemed more steady back row passing (maybe the stats say otherwise), obviously can hit from the back row as we saw in 2021, and has at least an average to above-average serve? Despite her famous run in the NC game last year, Demps' serve is not all that great. Whereas Shanel and Boyer clearly had two of the better serves on the team (I'd rate our best in order as Izzy-Boyer-MJ-Shanel-Orzol-Liz G-GG, though I did quite like Smrek's serve the one time we saw it). So I claim that 5 of our best 6 servers served that second time around, assuming Sheff made the subs. I always got the feeling he was going to avoid both serving subs if the score was still low at that point, but that didn't seem to happen much if at all. |
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Dec 13, 2022 0:39:48 GMT -5
That is what Sheffield was coaching his passers to pass to - a spot 8' off the net. We've seen numerous instances when they scored their passers differently than VM, when to my eye they passed well and the offense was running smoothly, but VM did not think so. Frankly I'd be more interested in knowing exactly where the ball was set, and the reliability of that location, rather than having a score that assigned a fixed value to a particular position. This is not to defend the passing this last two matches. It wasn't good enough. As I recall, what he said was if it's a tough serve, we want you aiming 8' off the net - we don't you trying too hard for a perfect pass and overpassing it, and we can run offense from 8'. It turns out that was a white lie because neither of our setters could effectively set middle from 8', but (and maybe Sheff knew this at the time) since we were a transition team, as long as we got a decent swing from the play we had good chances - perfect wasn't necessary. And as the year progressed, you saw the passers steadily get more confident at taking easier serves and diming them to about 4' off the net for the triple option, while playing tougher serves more consistently. My guess is that the internal numbers that the Badgers kept for passing (which are significantly higher than volleymetrics) took into account those instructions for tough serves. But I think the standard is the standard, and that objectively speaking a pass 8' off the net near the setter's mark is a 2. Which, if you pass a tough serve with a score of 2, you succeeded. Certainly we failed to hit that mark quite a few times against Pitt. You're right. My take of "running an offense" was that he wanted a BR offense to work the middle of the defense (as opposed to running the middle blocker on quicks) and prioritized avoiding over passes. Of course the other side of the coin is that the badger's passers just were not precise or reliable enough to get closer to the net without overpassing. It was better to hedge, and Sheffield thought the hedge was worth it. The hypothesis was that they could compensate. I agree with another poster that the BR attack kind of drifted out of being a main part of the offense for whatever reason. Also, I really thought we would see that combo play more often, but that probably needs better passing. |
|
|
|
Post by skinny on Dec 13, 2022 9:20:17 GMT -5
Gregorski is graduating from Madison this week then correct? Hard to believe she would bolt without getting that UW degree. Also i see MacDonald and Georgia volleyball are following each other on Instagram now.
|
|
|
|
Post by tablealgebra on Dec 13, 2022 9:27:11 GMT -5
Gregorski is graduating from Madison this week then correct? Hard to believe she would bolt without getting that UW degree. Also i see MacDonald and Georgia volleyball are following each other on Instagram now. Yes, they are both graduating seniors intending to using their COVID years at a different school. |
|
|
|
Post by volleyball90 on Dec 13, 2022 9:29:31 GMT -5
That is what Sheffield was coaching his passers to pass to - a spot 8' off the net. We've seen numerous instances when they scored their passers differently than VM, when to my eye they passed well and the offense was running smoothly, but VM did not think so. Frankly I'd be more interested in knowing exactly where the ball was set, and the reliability of that location, rather than having a score that assigned a fixed value to a particular position. This is not to defend the passing this last two matches. It wasn't good enough. As I recall, what he said was if it's a tough serve, we want you aiming 8' off the net - we don't you trying too hard for a perfect pass and overpassing it, and we can run offense from 8'. It turns out that was a white lie because neither of our setters could effectively set middle from 8', but (and maybe Sheff knew this at the time) since we were a transition team, as long as we got a decent swing from the play we had good chances - perfect wasn't necessary. And as the year progressed, you saw the passers steadily get more confident at taking easier serves and diming them to about 4' off the net for the triple option, while playing tougher serves more consistently. My guess is that the internal numbers that the Badgers kept for passing (which are significantly higher than volleymetrics) took into account those instructions for tough serves. But I think the standard is the standard, and that objectively speaking a pass 8' off the net near the setter's mark is a 2. Which, if you pass a tough serve with a score of 2, you succeeded. Certainly we failed to hit that mark quite a few times against Pitt. This. You cannot give a 3 if your setter can't set the middle, I don't care how hard the serve was or what the instruction to the passers is. Our setters cannot make that set. I believe VM only considers 3's to be a "good pass"? And it makes sense to me that Sheff can grade 2's as a good pass because of the kind of team we were this year. But its pretty objective as to what is a 3 and you just cannot give a 3 grade to any pass that our setters can't set the middle too. With Carlini, her 3 target zone probably could have been quite a bit larger, this is not the Carlini era anymore though. |
|
|
|
Post by robtearle on Dec 13, 2022 9:58:17 GMT -5
Gregorski is graduating from Madison this week then correct? Hard to believe she would bolt without getting that UW degree. Also i see MacDonald and Georgia volleyball are following each other on Instagram now. Yes, they are both graduating seniors intending to using their COVID years at a different school. I don't think the "this week" part is correct, though. |
|
|
|
Post by wibadgervbfan on Dec 13, 2022 11:45:47 GMT -5
Winter commencement is Sunday, December 18th. Speaker is Charlie Berens.
|
|
|
|
Post by robtearle on Dec 13, 2022 12:02:00 GMT -5
Winter commencement is Sunday, December 18th. Speaker is Charlie Berens. If Gregorski had been an early high school graduate and been at UW for spring semester 2019, then her graduating in Dec 2022 would be 'on schedule'. But she wasn't. She graduated from Appleton Xavier (my high school as well, though I was "a few years" before her) on regular schedule, spring of 2019. So for her to be graduating "this week" would be a semester ahead, in 3 and 1/2 years. Certainly possible (I actually did it) but unlikely, especially given the time requirements to be a student athletes. She'll graduate, just not "this week". That's all I'm saying. (I've tried to look up who the speaker was for 'my ceremony' but can't find it. As best I recall, the president of some small college in WI, Carroll College or Marian College, maybe. The same day, the Packers were playing the Rams, win and they go to the playoffs. I watched football. Packers lost. :-) |
|
|
|
Post by rainbowbadger on Dec 13, 2022 12:45:52 GMT -5
Winter commencement is Sunday, December 18th. Speaker is Charlie Berens. That should be fun. He's done UW commencement before, I think. ETA: He did UW's J school commencement in 2018. |
|
|
|
Post by badgerguru on Dec 13, 2022 12:50:26 GMT -5
Winter commencement is Sunday, December 18th. Speaker is Charlie Berens. If Gregorski had been an early high school graduate and been at UW for spring semester 2019, then her graduating in Dec 2022 would be 'on schedule'. But she wasn't. She graduated from Appleton Xavier (my high school as well, though I was "a few years" before her) on regular schedule, spring of 2019. So for her to be graduating "this week" would be a semester ahead, in 3 and 1/2 years. Certainly possible (I actually did it) but unlikely, especially given the time requirements to be a student athletes. She'll graduate, just not "this week". That's all I'm saying. (I've tried to look up who the speaker was for 'my ceremony' but can't find it. As best I recall, the president of some small college in WI, Carroll College or Marian College, maybe. The same day, the Packers were playing the Rams, win and they go to the playoffs. I watched football. Packers lost. :-) Or she took summer classes to get ahead to be able to graduate once volleyball season was over. |
|
|
|
Post by greatlakesvballer on Dec 13, 2022 15:51:18 GMT -5
Idk if it has been posted Going somewhere to play beach. She needs something easier on the knees. She also announced this in interviews months ago. Sheila Shaw played pro beach, right? I wonder if she's still in SoCal.... |
|
|
|
Post by buckypete on Dec 13, 2022 16:40:56 GMT -5
Going somewhere to play beach. She needs something easier on the knees. She also announced this in interviews months ago. Sheila Shaw played pro beach, right? I wonder if she's still in SoCal.... Well, not over the weekend..... Have some strong 2004 vibes. https://www.instagram.com/p/CmApoQPLp4H |
|
