|
Post by anOPINionATEDbeACH(hookemboo) on Feb 13, 2023 18:57:53 GMT -5
Pointing out that someone hit sub .200 with 1 kill/set seems like a pretty good rebuttal to "her offense is great." She wasn't elite, but she WAS one of their best attackers. You obviously didn't watch pitt either. Also next time, how about quoting me?? 😗
|
|
|
Post by donut on Feb 13, 2023 19:32:08 GMT -5
Pointing out that someone hit sub .200 with 1 kill/set seems like a pretty good rebuttal to "her offense is great." as someone who watched most pitt games fairbanks tended to be relied on a good deal offensively against the tougher parts of their schedule. Especially OOS and well her stats offensively look bad I do think she was a very important part of Pitt’s success. The Courtney D ball was hit or miss and Fairbanks tended to get her kills in big moments. She isn’t an elite ncaa opp but I think in this case the stats don’t tell the whole story. Pitt would switch to a 5-1 in some rotations or sub her out of the front row to give some other players time too like Sabrina or to get some slide offense going in a 5-1. All in all I just think Rachel’s play isn’t nearly as poor as the season stats looked more so than most other players bc Obiv stats never tell the whole story One poster claimed that the reason she wasn't setting in a 5-1 was because her offense was great.
I don't think that's true, including that I don't think her offense was great. That's all.
|
|
|
Post by donut on Feb 13, 2023 19:32:41 GMT -5
Pointing out that someone hit sub .200 with 1 kill/set seems like a pretty good rebuttal to "her offense is great." She wasn't elite, but she WAS one of their best attackers. You obviously didn't watch pitt either. Also next time, how about quoting me?? 😗 You need to come up with a better rebuttal to her attacking stats than "you obviously don't watch Pitt"
|
|
|
Post by anOPINionATEDbeACH(hookemboo) on Feb 14, 2023 0:05:02 GMT -5
She wasn't elite, but she WAS one of their best attackers. You obviously didn't watch pitt either. Also next time, how about quoting me?? 😗 You need to come up with a better rebuttal to her attacking stats than "you obviously don't watch Pitt" Nah, I'm good. Let like I said you don't watch pitt, cause is ya did you would've saw yourself Dalton & Gomez weren't the most terminal. Which left double blocks for everybody else.
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Feb 14, 2023 2:42:28 GMT -5
Pointing out that someone hit sub .200 with 1 kill/set seems like a pretty good rebuttal to "her offense is great." as someone who watched most pitt games fairbanks tended to be relied on a good deal offensively against the tougher parts of their schedule. Especially OOS and well her stats offensively look bad I do think she was a very important part of Pitt’s success. The Courtney D ball was hit or miss and Fairbanks tended to get her kills in big moments. She isn’t an elite ncaa opp but I think in this case the stats don’t tell the whole story. Pitt would switch to a 5-1 in some rotations or sub her out of the front row to give some other players time too like Sabrina or to get some slide offense going in a 5-1. All in all I just think Rachel’s play isn’t nearly as poor as the season stats looked more so than most other players bc Obiv stats never tell the whole story I don't inherently disagree that she was an important part of Pitt's overall success or that she didn't play as poor as the season stats suggest. I think she does add value staying front row in a 6-2 such as being able to run a tempo ball in transition when the back row setter takes the first ball. What I disagree with is this notion that she didn't set in a 5-1 because she was great offensively or that Pitt needed her offensively and that's why she didn't set in a 5-1, even thought she is, what hookemboo described, a special setter that is the only one the can consistently push middle 10 feet off the net. The tougher parts of their schedule - against ranked competition: San Diego - 4 kills in 5 sets (.231) BYU -7 kills in 4 sets (.143) Ohio State - 3 kills in 3 sets (.375) *she primarily set this match* Georgia Tech - 3 kills in 4 sets (.063) Louisville - 8 kills in 5 sets (.182) Louisville - 2 kills in 3 sets (.000) Georgia Tech - 5 kills in 5 sets (.136) BYU - 10 kills in 3 sets (.381) Florida - 5 kills in 4 sets (.000) Wisconsin - 7 kills in 5 sets (.086) Louisville - 8 kills in 5 sets (0.77) I watched plenty of Pitt matches as well. Individual posters' selective memories aside, even from the numbers above, her managing a kill in "big moments" during the above-mentioned matches seem more like chance than something that can be consistently counted on.
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Feb 14, 2023 2:58:58 GMT -5
Pointing out that someone hit sub .200 with 1 kill/set seems like a pretty good rebuttal to "her offense is great." She wasn't elite, but she WAS one of their best attackers. You obviously didn't watch pitt either. Also next time, how about quoting me?? 😗 Well, saying she was one of Pitt's best attackers is different than saying she was great offensively. I don't really care to argue whether or not she was one of Pitt's best attackers, but other than selective eye bias, suggesting she was a great offensively is not defensible. You originally said that Pitt ran a 6-2 because Fairbanks' offense is great, which, incidentally, contradicted a statement you made a page earlier when you said that Pitt's offense was not great outside of Buzzerio and the middles. ![](https://media.giphy.com/media/zzkKhsPWRAGYw/giphy.gif)
|
|
|
Post by coahc21 on Feb 14, 2023 9:12:11 GMT -5
She wasn't elite, but she WAS one of their best attackers. You obviously didn't watch pitt either. Also next time, how about quoting me?? 😗 Well, saying she was one of Pitt's best attackers is different than saying she was great offensively. I don't really care to argue whether or not she was one of Pitt's best attackers, but other than selective eye bias, suggesting she was a great offensively is not defensible. You originally said that Pitt ran a 6-2 because Fairbanks' offense is great, which, incidentally, contradicted a statement you made a page earlier when you said that Pitt's offense was not great outside of Buzzerio and the middles. ![](https://media.giphy.com/media/zzkKhsPWRAGYw/giphy.gif) I think what it comes down to is that, while she is not GREAT offensively, Fish obviously thought running a 6-2 was beneficial -- could be because Akeo connected better with some hitters, could be because their middles were far better in front of the setter and Fairbanks was a better option than Gray or Nwokolo on the slide -- I don't think Fairbanks is head and shoulders ahead of Akeo as a setter, which I think is need to justify a 5-1 if they like the matchups created in a 6-2..
|
|
|
Post by donut on Feb 14, 2023 11:23:35 GMT -5
You need to come up with a better rebuttal to her attacking stats than "you obviously don't watch Pitt" Nah, I'm good. Let like I said you don't watch pitt, cause is ya did you would've saw yourself Dalton & Gomez weren't the most terminal. Which left double blocks for everybody else. lmao
|
|
|
Post by volleyfella on Mar 14, 2023 17:15:07 GMT -5
It'll be interesting to see Keegan's influence on the Minnesota program this season
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Mar 14, 2023 17:27:41 GMT -5
It'll be interesting to see Keegan's influence on the Minnesota program this season How so?
|
|
|
Post by GatorsChomp on Mar 19, 2023 10:32:47 GMT -5
i lowkey missed this entire pitt discussion oops
|
|