|
Post by AmeriCanVBfan on Sept 8, 2024 8:41:56 GMT -5
Should be a good game to help the Gophers get back on track an re-bolster their confidence. What do you think gogophers?
|
|
|
Post by vonner on Sept 8, 2024 9:01:14 GMT -5
I’d like to think we’re 100% winning St Thomas, LIU, North Dakota, Chicago State and Green Bay. Auburn at home could still prove to be an interesting test of seeing where we’re at. Wish I felt more confidently that that was a gimme. P4 teams should be licking their chops at a chance to beat Minnesota. The Auburn match will be a test, but luckily the team will have some rest by then. This team definitely needs a break. Well, the Auburn match will be their third match in four days.
Tues: Tommies
Thurs: LIU Fri: Auburn
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanVBfan on Sept 8, 2024 9:12:27 GMT -5
Luckily, the rest of the pre-conference schedule should be manageable for Minnesota. Will give them chances to win in fewer sets and iron things out 😊 I’d like to think we’re 100% winning St Thomas, LIU, North Dakota, Chicago State and Green Bay. Auburn at home could still prove to be an interesting test of seeing where we’re at. Wish I felt more confidently that that was a gimme. P4 teams should be licking their chops at a chance to beat Minnesota. Auburn lost some significant players from last year’s squad. Not sure how tough they are.
|
|
|
Post by mplsgopher on Sept 8, 2024 9:13:50 GMT -5
An assist is meaningless, in the double-less era. Just shut up. All you do is s**t on players. If I huck a spinning ball towards the left side of the net, 10 feet off the net, and the hitter manages to find a way to put it down .... I assisted them in that kill?
There absolutely can be times where the setter does indeed assist the effort. Awarding it automatically is bunk.
|
|
|
Post by badgerbyproxy on Sept 8, 2024 9:15:41 GMT -5
The Auburn match will be a test, but luckily the team will have some rest by then. This team definitely needs a break. Well, the Auburn match will be their third match in four days.
Tues: Tommies
Thurs: LIU Fri: Auburn
Yes, but 1) they’ll be at home the rest of the preaseason and won’t have to factor in travel time to their schedules, and 2) St Thomas and LIU are nowhere near as menacing as Stanford/Texas/Baylor/TCU.
|
|
|
Post by mplsgopher on Sept 8, 2024 9:16:50 GMT -5
Don’t forget about Kinney next year. Heard she’s the real deal. I’m just tired of the “next year talk” I don’t understand how this program year after year has the same passing issues. I will say watching them in person these last two days, Z can dig a ball! Yep of course Kinney in that group too; definitely at the forefront of pioneers for redirecting this program. Must’ve accidentally backspaced her name from the list in my OP. It’s unfortunate that you have to hear it a lot but it is going to take a few years and a new wave of players to potentially get the program back on track. And it’s no guarantee. That assumes that these recruits progress and develop steadily and maybe have tools and traits as a player that some of the current and recent gopher players do not. And that Coach Cook can embrace using the portal to add a big piece or two each year and fill in holes. Not sure exactly where to pinpoint the problem, but certainly some of the big name recruits had/have plateaued and didn’t develop into the caliber of player that their recruiting ranking (a meaningless number btw) may have indicated they would become. Ball control seems like it hasn’t been prioritized in a while. The program has had an out of system problem for a number of years as well. For all of Hugh’s undeniable greatness in his career, he didn’t leave the program in good shape towards the end of his time here. That’s just a fact. Strong passers, athletic/aggressive pins who can adjust to different sets, and Stella running the show would be a recipe to turn this thing around over the next few years. That’s a lot… We’ll see. Some really great posts you've had here.
There were three players in particular who came to use a few years ago with highly-touted rankings. One of which I believe Hugh committed to in like 8th grade or something?? Had dreams of turning her into the next national team star.
Can't agree enough that those rankings are bunk.
|
|
|
Post by mplsgopher on Sept 8, 2024 9:17:43 GMT -5
I’d like to think we’re 100% winning St Thomas, LIU, North Dakota, Chicago State and Green Bay. Auburn at home could still prove to be an interesting test of seeing where we’re at. Wish I felt more confidently that that was a gimme. P4 teams should be licking their chops at a chance to beat Minnesota. Auburn lost some significant players from last year’s squad. Not sure how tough they are. Did they add anyone through the portal though?
|
|
|
Post by mplsgopher on Sept 8, 2024 9:21:00 GMT -5
Can't have your primary offensive weapons hitting in the .100s Did not watch this weekend because ESPN+.
But I am going to wild guess this is what happened: their block camped out on the OH, Hanson and Wucherer swung hard early, got roofed hard. Then started doing weak tips and two-hand put overs that were just free balls. Went back to swinging hard some times, getting roofed sometimes, putting it down or getting touches sometimes.
Sound about right?
Since we aren't capable of having hits come from the middle of the net, we need more to the right side, both to Grote and on slides. It's gotta be closer to 50/50 split. Can't have 75-80% of sets going to the OH.
|
|
|
Post by vonner on Sept 8, 2024 9:21:39 GMT -5
Well, the Auburn match will be their third match in four days.
Tues: Tommies
Thurs: LIU Fri: Auburn
Yes, but 1) they’ll be at home the rest of the preaseason and won’t have to factor in travel time to their schedules, and 2) St Thomas and LIU are nowhere near as menacing as Stanford/Texas/Baylor/TCU. I guess I was more referring to the "the team will have some rest" part. They will have rest Sunday, Monday, and Wednesday, games on Tuesday, Thursday, and Friday.
|
|
|
Post by mplsgopher on Sept 8, 2024 9:23:47 GMT -5
An assist is meaningless, in the double-less era. No, it's not. How are you assisting anything by hucking a spinning ball with inconsistent placement over to your hitters??
I'm NOT saying that that's what Shaffmaster was doing. It is a general hypothetical question.
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanVBfan on Sept 8, 2024 9:28:40 GMT -5
Just shut up. All you do is s**t on players. If I huck a spinning ball towards the left side of the net, 10 feet off the net, and the hitter manages to find a way to put it down .... I assisted them in that kill?
There absolutely can be times where the setter does indeed assist the effort. Awarding it automatically is bunk. While I do understand your point, volleyball ain’t figure skating and points aren’t awarded for technical proficiency. A hitter can’t hit a ball that doesn’t get to them. If you get the ball to the hitter and they get a kill, you assisted in that. No matter how ugly it looks.
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanVBfan on Sept 8, 2024 9:30:39 GMT -5
Auburn lost some significant players from last year’s squad. Not sure how tough they are. Did they add anyone through the portal though? I’m not sure. I may go and check out their roster.
|
|
|
Post by zero-rotation outside hitter on Sept 8, 2024 9:34:26 GMT -5
How are you assisting anything by hucking a spinning ball with inconsistent placement over to your hitters?? I'm NOT saying that that's what Shaffmaster was doing. It is a general hypothetical question.
Your comment suggesting that assists are "meaningless" because doubles are no longer a thing (as long as they stay on your side) is a bridge way way too far. I remember Hugh McCutcheon making a good argument for taking away the double rule. It was something to the effect of "you're not usually bettering the ball when you double it, so it's not like teams are getting some kind of advantage if we let it slide." That's a rational point of view from where I stand. So, if someone "doubles" a ball (again remembering that it's somewhat subjective) and it still happens to be positioned in a spot that actually allows a hitter to get a kill off of it, then why would you be suggesting that a set like that should have no meaning statistically? Or that somehow the number of sets now under the new rule that result in kills are so often doubles that it makes assists a meaningless category. It is simply not the case. Again, your comment seemed, to me, an enormous leap in logic. Edit: I'll an an analogy. It's sort of like saying "a kill is meaningless now that they count a dig that happens to go over and land on the other side as a kill" (which I realize has been the rule forever). Yes, seems weird to consider a shot or point like that being a "kill," but it's just how it's categorized statistically. It doesn't take away from Hanson's kill total as a fair measure of her hitting performance, for example, if Z happens to get a bump kill.
|
|
|
Post by mplsgopher on Sept 8, 2024 9:35:37 GMT -5
If I huck a spinning ball towards the left side of the net, 10 feet off the net, and the hitter manages to find a way to put it down .... I assisted them in that kill?
There absolutely can be times where the setter does indeed assist the effort. Awarding it automatically is bunk. While I do understand your point, volleyball ain’t figure skating and points aren’t awarded for technical proficiency. A hitter can’t hit a ball that doesn’t get to them. If you get the ball to the hitter and they get a kill, you assisted in that. No matter how ugly it looks. While I do understand that point, then trying to parade around and celebrate a certain number of assists ... is bunk.
Similar scenario to celebrating number of passing yards thrown by a QB who only throws 5 yard routes and then the receivers do all the work, I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by mplsgopher on Sept 8, 2024 9:42:11 GMT -5
How are you assisting anything by hucking a spinning ball with inconsistent placement over to your hitters?? I'm NOT saying that that's what Shaffmaster was doing. It is a general hypothetical question.
Your comment suggesting that assists are "meaningless" because doubles are no longer a thing (as long as they stay on your side) is a bridge way way too far. I remember Hugh McCutcheon making a good argument for taking away the double rule. It was something to the effect of "you're not usually bettering the ball when you double it, so it's not like teams are getting some kind of advantage if we let it slide." That's a rational point of view from where I stand. So, if someone "doubles" a ball (again remembering that it's somewhat subjective) and it still happens to be positioned in a spot that actually allows a hitter to get a kill off of it, then why would you be suggesting that a set like that should have no meaning statistically? Or that somehow the number of sets now under the new rule that result in kills are so often doubles that it makes assists a meaningless category. It is simply not the case. Again, your comment seemed, to me, an enormous leap in logic. To be clear, I love the new no doubles rule. It's correct. It's silly and takes away from the game (and in particular makes it less accessible to casual fans tuning in on TV, which is very important to continue attracting them) to call it.
The thing we should all be able to agree on, and the logical basis of my thinking is: it's harder to hit a ball with the direction/control you desire if it's spinning, than if it's not spinning. Right? You should be able to accept that, it's correct. Just physics.
So if a setter sends a spinning ball over to the hitter, they (the setter) are making it harder to get a kill than if the ball had no or minimal spin.
At the end of the day: I don't get awarding a positive stat to the set just because the hitter was able to get a kill in spite of the set.
|
|