Nebraska @ Wisconsin: Wed 10/26/22, 8 PM CT (BTN)

[give me the og-ball-u]

voted for this because i didnt think it would happen and i ended up being right!

for psychic evaluations about volleyball futures (i correctly predicted that every other country would hate shreveport, my fantasy league team was drafted to not win a single game, etc.) please contact bic!

[volleyball303]

Oct 27, 2022 0:27:25 GMT -5 badgersinsix said:

So I’m sitting in the field house thinking ok can we just let Izzy run a 5-1 yet? But then I’m thinking well the 6-2 is about to get us a win in this match and tied for the B1G lead so we can’t go away from it , can we? And now I check the stats and see MJ had 9 assists and Smrek only had 1 kill and 0 blocks. So I guess where that leaves me is, did MJ seriously only have 9 assists and Smrek 0 blocks or is sidearm wrong? No joke.

Would it have been a good idea to use the double sub when Hamas went on that long service run? I don’t really follow Wisconsin. Izzy is listed at 5’11 so I would assume she has a decent block. No one would have expected Wisconsin to win with one of their setters getting only 9 assists.

[Deleted]

Game is up ( Starting at 9-7 Huskers in Set 1)

[nevollfan]

Wisconsin clearly won the serve snd pass portion, which set them up for the victory. You can’t just look at the box score of services aces and missed serves. Nebraska never got in a rhythm, other than when Hames had her run serving. Wisconsin pins got better looks and swings throughout the match. The Wisconsin block posed problems with the aid of their serving. The best team won Wednesday and the MSU transfer, Franklin, was easily the best terminator among all outsides, hands down.

[robtearle]

Oct 27, 2022 7:59:32 GMT -5 volleyball303 said:

Oct 27, 2022 0:27:25 GMT -5 badgersinsix said:

So I’m sitting in the field house thinking ok can we just let Izzy run a 5-1 yet? But then I’m thinking well the 6-2 is about to get us a win in this match and tied for the B1G lead so we can’t go away from it , can we? And now I check the stats and see MJ had 9 assists and Smrek only had 1 kill and 0 blocks. So I guess where that leaves me is, did MJ seriously only have 9 assists and Smrek 0 blocks or is sidearm wrong? No joke.

Would it have been a good idea to use the double sub when Hamas went on that long service run? I don’t really follow Wisconsin. Izzy is listed at 5’11 so I would assume she has a decent block. No one would have expected Wisconsin to win with one of their setters getting only 9 assists.

By double sub, do you mean the regular 6-2 offense Izzy for Smrek and Devyn for MJ? That would have left you with Devyn back row and Izzy front row for two sideout-rotations. What Sheffield did do in the middle of Hames' run was sub in Demps for Smrek. Two points later, Demps got the kill to end the run.

(And what he might have done - and I said this to the guy next to me in the Field House before Hames started, so not Thursday morning coaching: the serving run came on the receive side of Bramschreiber/Franklin's turn to serve, with the score 22-12. I said I wonder if Sheffield leaves Branschreiber in to play across the back, because at that score, you need defense more than you need offense. But as soon as Nebraska sided out Bramschreiber, Franklin came back in.)

[tablealgebra]

RE: Hammill's 9 assists.

Considering how many points Wisconsin won on serve while Ashburn was out there as opposed to Hammill, Ashburn had a ton more opportunities. But it is still an unsettling stat - your side outs should mostly come on setter assists, largely in system (as opposed to service points which are going to be won with stuff blocks or in transition). If the Hammill group is our weaker group, we need to be able to side out through those points - and 9 setter assists indicates that we weren't doing that in system. If we struggle to do that, then it's an argument for going back to the 5-1 with Izzy and just concentrating on siding out rotations 4-6 on the initial reception (eliminating concerns about blocking weaknesses).

That being said, I think most UW fans believe it's just a bad day at the office for Hammill and the coaching staff will stick with her and just try to get her back on track.

[volleyball90]

Oct 27, 2022 9:21:48 GMT -5 tablealgebra said:

RE: Hammill's 9 assists.

Considering how many points Wisconsin won on serve while Ashburn was out there as opposed to Hammill, Ashburn had a ton more opportunities. But it is still an unsettling stat - your side outs should mostly come on setter assists, largely in system (as opposed to service points which are going to be won with stuff blocks or in transition). If the Hammill group is our weaker group, we need to be able to side out through those points - and 9 setter assists indicates that we weren't doing that in system. If we struggle to do that, then it's an argument for going back to the 5-1 with Izzy and just concentrating on siding out rotations 4-6 on the initial reception (eliminating concerns about blocking weaknesses).

That being said, I think most UW fans believe it's just a bad day at the office for Hammill and the coaching staff will stick with her and just try to get her back on track.

On the year Izzy and MJ lineups have actually been scoring at similar rate. Shocking because the eye test definitely makes it seem like Izzy is much better (her defense appears to be better and her sets are way cleaner), but stats say otherwise. Someone posted it in Badger topic. So it was likely just a bad day for Hammill. That being said, Kelly has switched to a 5-1 with Izzy before mid match (forgot which one) so I think if push comes to shove, that is the out, but being able to put up 3 hitters/blockers at all times seems like the current goal at the moment. 

[oldmanred]

Oct 26, 2022 23:15:51 GMT -5 clob said:

Not trying to rub salt into wounds, but kudos to the VT pollsters who kept Texas #1.

Yes you are!

[robtearle]

Oct 27, 2022 9:35:40 GMT -5 volleyball90 said:

Oct 27, 2022 9:21:48 GMT -5 tablealgebra said:

RE: Hammill's 9 assists.

Considering how many points Wisconsin won on serve while Ashburn was out there as opposed to Hammill, Ashburn had a ton more opportunities. But it is still an unsettling stat - your side outs should mostly come on setter assists, largely in system (as opposed to service points which are going to be won with stuff blocks or in transition). If the Hammill group is our weaker group, we need to be able to side out through those points - and 9 setter assists indicates that we weren't doing that in system. If we struggle to do that, then it's an argument for going back to the 5-1 with Izzy and just concentrating on siding out rotations 4-6 on the initial reception (eliminating concerns about blocking weaknesses).

That being said, I think most UW fans believe it's just a bad day at the office for Hammill and the coaching staff will stick with her and just try to get her back on track.

On the year Izzy and MJ lineups have actually been scoring at similar rate. Shocking because the eye test definitely makes it seem like Izzy is much better (her defense appears to be better and her sets are way cleaner), but stats say otherwise. Someone posted it in Badger topic. So it was likely just a bad day for Hammill. That being said, Kelly has switched to a 5-1 with Izzy before mid match (forgot which one) so I think if push comes to shove, that is the out, but being able to put up 3 hitters/blockers at all times seems like the current goal at the moment. 

That was me. Prior to last night, the percent of 'points won while player X is the setter' was just about tied; 54.1% for Izzy, and 53.4% for MJ. Last night was just a one-off, an aberration. Whether due to match-ups or just randomness, almost certainly a one-night thing.

As for 'switching to a 5-1', the only times I remember that happening was at the end of sets when bumping up against the sub limit, and it has been MJ as the 'forever setter' as often as it has been Izzy (though I can't say which sets and matches off the top of my head).

[savannahbadger]

Oct 27, 2022 9:21:48 GMT -5 tablealgebra said:

If we struggle to do that, then it's an argument for going back to the 5-1 with Izzy and just concentrating on siding out rotations 4-6 on the initial reception (eliminating concerns about blocking weaknesses).

The best thing for our system is to stick to our guns, and not keep changing it up from match to match like it seems like Cook has done. Changing to a 5-1 is a good way to ruin MJ’s confidence and make the whole situation worse, like it seems to have done to Orr.

[rainbowbadger]

MJ is solid. She's smart. I have every confidence that she's gonna hit the film hard and make the necessary adjustments.

[oldmanred]

What's with Orr anyway? Why is she not playing? Is Cook trying to get her to transfer? She looks miserable on the bench!!!

[radioactiveman]

Oct 27, 2022 9:35:40 GMT -5 volleyball90 said:

Oct 27, 2022 9:21:48 GMT -5 tablealgebra said:

RE: Hammill's 9 assists.

Considering how many points Wisconsin won on serve while Ashburn was out there as opposed to Hammill, Ashburn had a ton more opportunities. But it is still an unsettling stat - your side outs should mostly come on setter assists, largely in system (as opposed to service points which are going to be won with stuff blocks or in transition). If the Hammill group is our weaker group, we need to be able to side out through those points - and 9 setter assists indicates that we weren't doing that in system. If we struggle to do that, then it's an argument for going back to the 5-1 with Izzy and just concentrating on siding out rotations 4-6 on the initial reception (eliminating concerns about blocking weaknesses).

That being said, I think most UW fans believe it's just a bad day at the office for Hammill and the coaching staff will stick with her and just try to get her back on track.

On the year Izzy and MJ lineups have actually been scoring at similar rate. Shocking because the eye test definitely makes it seem like Izzy is much better (her defense appears to be better and her sets are way cleaner), but stats say otherwise. Someone posted it in Badger topic. So it was likely just a bad day for Hammill. That being said, Kelly has switched to a 5-1 with Izzy before mid match (forgot which one) so I think if push comes to shove, that is the out, but being able to put up 3 hitters/blockers at all times seems like the current goal at the moment. 

On the season Izzy is averaging around 2 assists more per set than MJ.  You can explain a single game by runs or if one setter is digging a lot more than the other.  But over the course of an entire season that's a big difference especially when both setters have similar digging numbers.

[volleyball90]

Oct 27, 2022 10:02:06 GMT -5 robtearle said:

Oct 27, 2022 9:35:40 GMT -5 volleyball90 said:

On the year Izzy and MJ lineups have actually been scoring at similar rate. Shocking because the eye test definitely makes it seem like Izzy is much better (her defense appears to be better and her sets are way cleaner), but stats say otherwise. Someone posted it in Badger topic. So it was likely just a bad day for Hammill. That being said, Kelly has switched to a 5-1 with Izzy before mid match (forgot which one) so I think if push comes to shove, that is the out, but being able to put up 3 hitters/blockers at all times seems like the current goal at the moment. 

That was me. Prior to last night, the percent of 'points won while player X is the setter' was just about tied; 54.1% for Izzy, and 53.4% for MJ. Last night was just a one-off, an aberration. Whether due to match-ups or just randomness, almost certainly a one-night thing.

As for 'switching to a 5-1', the only times I remember that happening was at the end of sets when bumping up against the sub limit, and it has been MJ as the 'forever setter' as often as it has been Izzy (though I can't say which sets and matches off the top of my head).

I thought it occurred during a non sub limit point, but I could be misremembering for sure. I would say its telling though that Izzy is the one who starts, which means she will see more court time on average. 

[radioactiveman]

Oct 27, 2022 10:21:23 GMT -5 oldmanred said:

What's with Orr anyway? Why is she not playing? Is Cook trying to get her to transfer? She looks miserable on the bench!!!

She's looked pretty bad when she was out there.  Not just the doubles but the set location and choices.   A few games ago she literally set the ball over the net.  Not on a dig.  On a set.  I've never seen that before at this level.  I didn't even know an overset was a thing. 


Plus she is really bad in back right D which doesn't work well in a 6-2.  She is a big block if she was running a 5-1 but her setting is way behind.  It's terrible she has this mental block but she's a liability right now.