2020 Lady Vol Recruiting Thread

#401
#401
VA_VOLFAN said:
Nobody chased DD off she chose to leave because she herself in the espn article said she was a pro playing college basketball for free because she had gotten her degree.

Chasing people off for cohesion purposes ? Westbrook left because she didn’t like the way things were going she didn’t get chased off and when she was reprimanded it was for missing classes and not upholding her part of being a student athlete. Still wish her the best but I didn’t see anybody chasing her off and matter of fact she met with CKHJ on occasions to see if they could get her to stay when Kellie asked her to make a decision she chose UConn and in having that convo Kellie Put TN first.

Even when you look at A. Hayes situation that was above the basketball team and that was seemingly a university decision and probably mutual on both parts.

About recruiting your right no one waits for you to recruit even Geno didn’t have a great class last year but he was able to plug the holes through other methods and even got some really good transfers. So missing out on a high school prospect doesn’t mean the end ask Geno about getting Westbrook someone who can come in and play and has experience. Now if 21’ class turns out to be like this it may be a problem but in all reality relationships for this class had been established for 2-3 years before and this staff was still able to get in on some of the best prospects to get them to consider.

I also agree about the losing mentality which is why I’m glad CKHJ seems to be changing the culture. She also didn’t seem scared to bench people when she wasn’t happy with their play overseas. That was something CHW seemed to have trouble with.
Click to expand...

Reality is that college recruiting for women basketball players have changed. It is starting to be like recruiting men college players in football and basketball. It is a dog eat dog business. I am not necessarily saying you have to be malicious and play dirty but go for the best, if that means some players transfer, then so be it.
 
#402
#402
teacherdean said:
Reality is that college recruiting for women basketball players have changed. It is starting to be like recruiting men college players in football and basketball. It is a dog eat dog business. I am not necessarily saying you have to be malicious and play dirty but go for the best, if that means some players transfer, then so be it.
Click to expand...

Yea I get that trust me but I also get you sign a young lady and then recruit over her in the same signing class and that person has to sit out because what you may have told them about playing is not true. My thing is coaches can leave whenever they want why can an athlete not do the same without penalty? You don’t have coaches sitting out a year or post season if they leave schools.

Again any young lady that chooses TN I want them to be the right fit and my comment earlier about them having 14 we know we have seen schools who over recruit player and have mass transfers and the coach just keeps on coaching while the players have to sit out.
 
#403
#403
teacherdean said:
Reality is that college recruiting for women basketball players have changed. It is starting to be like recruiting men college players in football and basketball. It is a dog eat dog business. I am not necessarily saying you have to be malicious and play dirty but go for the best, if that means some players transfer, then so be it.
Click to expand...

I don't think any top school does otherwise. Tennessee has always gone after the best players. Some were content to sit on the bench for 4 years, some transferred. Schools would be crazy to say no to a too kid who wanted to play there because they already have a middling player at that position. Hell, Massengill is already recruited over with Horston and Tenn was going hard for DaCosta when Davis was a freshman.

Survival of the fittest, as it should be. Good on Vic that he has the option to do so now instead of having to settle for 3-star players.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ttharp and lvocd
#404
#404
Amb3096 said:
I don't think any top school does otherwise. Tennessee has always gone after the best players. Some were content to sit on the bench for 4 years, some transferred. Schools would be crazy to say no to a too kid who wanted to play there because they already have a middling player at that position. Hell, Massengill is already recruited over with Horston and Tenn was going hard for DaCosta when Davis was a freshman.

Survival of the fittest, as it should be. Good on Vic that he has the option to do so now instead of having to settle for 3-star players.
Click to expand...

Uh huh but I remember under recruited players getting him where he was. When Kellie starts winning she will be taking MS girls well probably not lol but you get what I mean
 
Last edited:
#406
#406
Darth_Vol said:
Because Kellie is clearly getting desperate after whiffing on everyone she initially wanted...
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t say that. Tess didn’t play with an elite AAU team until this past summer, so I don’t really think anyone knew much about her except for folks in West TN. I really wish they would give Khyla Warren from Selmer TN a look. She is a beast! 6’2 post with handles and can shoot the 3
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hangtyme24 and lvocd
#407
#407
I don’t think this young lady is any less a recruit because she is not well known ! I watch the Tennessee state tournaments every year. And this young lady has good skills ! JMO. The classification of teams is by how many students are enrolled. Which has nothing to do with Basketball skill level ! The more students you have ( statistically speaking) the better your chances of having MORE good athletes than a smaller school . And as most would tell you..... if you want to get better you need to play better competition. Which single A schools would probably have less skilled teams to play against and the triple AAA teams should have more skilled players. But not always. It’s a numbers game of how many good athletes you can put on the floor !
Remember the #94 rated player in the NCAA tournament from Syracuse? She made our highly rated guards ( Diamond , MeMe , and anybody else who tried to guard her ) look foolish. Just Saying!
 
  • Like
Reactions: NoBackBoard
#410
#410
37620VOL said:
If Tess can d it up, she's exactly what we need. We desperately need 2 shooter/defenders to solve our problems with zone defenses.
Click to expand...

You have to solve zone defense before you can score in it.
You have to know how to attack its weaknesses or create faults within them.
Once you score consistently, you learn by proxy how to defend consistently.
(Hint: It starts with not watching the ball.!

6 NBA Championships, earned a total of 14 MVP awards, was selected to 14 All-Star games, won 10 scoring titles...

Michael Jordan was maybe the greatest 6'6" guard the NBA will ever see,,, In his career..6 NBA Championships, earned a total of 14 MVP awards, was selected to 14 All-Star games, won 10 scoring titles...and 9 NBA All-Defensive first team selections...Being that good on offense made him equally good on defense. He knew how to score, so he knew how to defend himself.

I use MJ in my coaching. I explain to my kids how he seemed to have so much more hangtime. But he didn't, really hang,,he finished his moves later in his flight, often in a downward flight...He simply finished his moves when everybody else was considering landing.
 
#411
#411
Coach Jumper said:
You have to solve zone defense before you can score in it.
You have to know how to attack its weaknesses or create faults within them.
Once you score consistently, you learn by proxy how to defend consistently.
(Hint: It starts with not watching the ball.!

IF YOU KNOW SO MUCH, HOW COME YOU HIDE BEHIND SUCH AN UGLY AVATAR?
Click to expand...
 
#413
#413
Solving a zone is a much tougher feat when you do not have the shooters to create space by drawing the defenders out. If you put two players on the court that can drain 24 footers, it creates all kinds of problems for the zone. If you don't have two shooters, the zone doesn't have to respect the perimeter and has fewer concerns on reversals.
 
#415
#415
37620VOL said:
Solving a zone is a much tougher feat when you do not have the shooters to create space by drawing the defenders out. If you put two players on the court that can drain 24 footers, it creates all kinds of problems for the zone. If you don't have two shooters, the zone doesn't have to respect the perimeter and has fewer concerns on reversals.
Click to expand...


Thank you for that.

If you don't have shooters and you have speed and height, you learn to hit players cutting through the zone and either hit the cutters who by cutting create confusion or passing to a a player whose defender is watching the ball and following it and not watching them. Misdirection.

Shooting is only one way to solve a zone...Movement is the other.

Not just random cuts, but purposeful cuts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: teacherdean, ttharp and lvocd
#416
#416
Coach Jumper said:
Thank you for that.

If you don't have shooters and you have speed and height, you learn to hit players cutting through the zone and either hit the cutters who by cutting create confusion or passing to a a player whose defender is watching the ball and following it and not watching them. Misdirection.

Shooting is only one way to solve a zone...Movement is the other.

Not just random cuts, but purposeful cuts.
Click to expand...
 
#417
#417
Coach Jumper said:
TShooting is only one way to solve a zone...Movement is the other.

Not just random cuts, but purposeful cuts.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I've been saying for years now that our cuts are too often casual, loose meanderings instead of quick, precise, PURPOSEFUL cuts. If I were coach I'd drill the heck out them on this, because it's (IMO) one of the main reasons Tennessee has rarely gotten a shooter open BY DESIGN since sometime during the Clinton Administration. :rolleyes:

The point is for OUR players to get to spots quickly, before defenses have enough time to adjust. The offense can't just casually stroll around looking like they are merely mindlessly going through the motions of getting to the other side. They need to do it with the PURPOSE of confusing and losing the defense. I feel like we haven't been able to confuse or lose anyone in years. Our casual-looking "offense" could be effectively guarded by a grouping of lawn chairs with opponents' jerseys draped over them as long as their head coach occasionally called timeouts to re-arrange them.

For the love of God, someone please help our players learn how to move in such a way that defenses can't get comfortable!!!!! o_O
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scissor Hands and ttharp
#418
#418
I hear you, Coach, but without shooters the defense can sag and eliminate your options. Entry passes to the elbow area become more dangerous, there are fewer lanes to make cuts, and any pass toward the basket is tighter. I'm sure you teach this, but I've always been taught that you work the ball from the wing to the elbow or baseline (picture a triangle) and overload the zone. So for an example of how the ball would move, your wing drives from the arc and creates space to pass to the elbow, this creates a cut for the player on the baseline to the basket. If it's open you hit her, if not you kick back to the wing who may be open for a 3 if the zone has collapsed. If the wing isn't open to shoot, you reverse to the top of the key, shot fake then reverse to the opposite wing. The baseline cutter knows the reverse is coming so she gets excellent position to post up on the opposite block after her cut. The wing makes the entry pass and the defense either double teams the post or leaves a one on one high percentage shot. If there's a double team the post has to find the person that is wide open for an even higher percentage shot.

That's how you break down a zone, but I don't think it works very well unless you have two very good shooters on the wings and a decent shooter at the top of the key.
 
#419
#419
37620VOL said:
I hear you, Coach, but without shooters the defense can sag and eliminate your options. Entry passes to the elbow area become more dangerous, there are fewer lanes to make cuts, and any pass toward the basket is tighter. I'm sure you teach this, but I've always been taught that you work the ball from the wing to the elbow or baseline (picture a triangle) and overload the zone. So for an example of how the ball would move, your wing drives from the arc and creates space to pass to the elbow, this creates a cut for the player on the baseline to the basket. If it's open you hit her, if not you kick back to the wing who may be open for a 3 if the zone has collapsed. If the wing isn't open to shoot, you reverse to the top of the key, shot fake then reverse to the opposite wing. The baseline cutter knows the reverse is coming so she gets excellent position to post up on the opposite block after her cut. The wing makes the entry pass and the defense either double teams the post or leaves a one on one high percentage shot. If there's a double team the post has to find the person that is wide open for an even higher percentage shot.

That's how you break down a zone, but I don't think it works very well unless you have two very good shooters on the wings and a decent shooter at the top of the key.
Click to expand...
7D8EE70E-7CCB-480D-9771-E8DB912F3868.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: mcannon1 and ChattyVolfan
#421
#421
All it takes is the mindset of urgency to win. Casual cuts do nothing but tick seconds off the shot clock. That casual approach got Holly canned. You have to want to win and be willing to put forth effort to accomplish your goal no matter how many stars you have besides your name.

lvocd said:
Exactly. I've been saying for years now that our cuts are too often casual, loose meanderings instead of quick, precise, PURPOSEFUL cuts. If I were coach I'd drill the out them on this, because it's (IMO) one of the main reasons Tennessee has rarely gotten a shooter open BY DESIGN since sometime during the Clinton Administration. :rolleyes:

The point is for OUR players to get to spots quickly, before defenses have enough time to adjust. The offense can't just casually stroll around looking like they are merely mindlessly going through the motions of getting to the other side. They need to do it with the PURPOSE of confusing and losing the defense. I feel like we haven't been able to confuse or lose anyone in years. Our casual-looking "offense" could be effectively guarded by a grouping of lawn chairs with opponents' jerseys draped over them as long as their head coach occasionally called timeouts to re-arrange them.

For the love of God, someone please help our players learn how to move in such a way that defenses can't get comfortable!!!!! o_O
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hangtyme24 and mcannon1
#423
#423
37620VOL said:
I hear you, Coach, but without shooters the defense can sag and eliminate your options. Entry passes to the elbow area become more dangerous, there are fewer lanes to make cuts, and any pass toward the basket is tighter. I'm sure you teach this, but I've always been taught that you work the ball from the wing to the elbow or baseline (picture a triangle) and overload the zone. So for an example of how the ball would move, your wing drives from the arc and creates space to pass to the elbow, this creates a cut for the player on the baseline to the basket. If it's open you hit her, if not you kick back to the wing who may be open for a 3 if the zone has collapsed. If the wing isn't open to shoot, you reverse to the top of the key, shot fake then reverse to the opposite wing. The baseline cutter knows the reverse is coming so she gets excellent position to post up on the opposite block after her cut. The wing makes the entry pass and the defense either double teams the post or leaves a one on one high percentage shot. If there's a double team the post has to find the person that is wide open for an even higher percentage shot.

That's how you break down a zone, but I don't think it works very well unless you have two very good shooters on the wings and a decent shooter at the top of the key.
Click to expand...

Agree.

as well,
shooting is also mental, or should I say, void of it...shooting is something done on auto-pilot from the moment your mind's eye calculates its mechanics. The only variance is movement in the act of shooting (fade-away for example)
what also can't factor in is,
"can I take the shot without repercussions?"
Shooters have to have a clear mind to shoot.
We don't know how good a shooters we have had recently because they never had a chance to shoot with clear minds.

"You can't have your picnic in a tornado"
 
  • Like
Reactions: Volfaninfl2
#424
#424
Absolutely. There's no thinking to it. The best coach I had taught us to take shots that were one point per shot. Inside the arc, that's a 50% shot; outside the arc, that's a 33% shot. For me, that made it an easy calculation to "pull the trigger", or not. Just providing the definition of what is a good shot made me a better in-game shooter --- No thinking.
 
#425
#425
Coach Jumper said:
Agree.

as well,
shooting is also mental, or should I say, void of it...shooting is something done on auto-pilot from the moment your mind's eye calculates its mechanics. The only variance is movement in the act of shooting (fade-away for example)
what also can't factor in is,
"can I take the shot without repercussions?"
Shooters have to have a clear mind to shoot.
We don't know how good a shooters we have had recently because they never had a chance to shoot with clear minds.

"You can't have your picnic in a tornado"
Click to expand...


It's safe to say Holly never saw a 3 point shot she liked....It had to wear on our girls minds...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Volfaninfl2, mlindsay and 37620VOL
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top