Lady Vols - LSU Game

#27
#27
Memvol44 said:
Nah. That arky win was legit!
Click to expand...

They took A&M til the end with one of their McD all americans and best players on the bench. Now A&M didn’t have two of theirs either who come off the bench.

They will be a tourney team pending injuries and pending there will be a tourney.

and if that win wasn’t legit Indiana was...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: VolBall09 and LadyVols_WBK
#28
#28
VA_VOLFAN said:
They took A&M til the end with one of their McD all americans and best players on the bench. Now A&M didn’t have two of theirs either who come off the bench.

They will be a tourney team pending injuries and pending there will be a tourney.

and if that win wasn’t legit Indiana was...
Click to expand...
Like I said, a win is a win is a win.

I do expect them to make the top 25 today. It will be good to see.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LadyVols_WBK
#29
#29
VA_VOLFAN said:
They took A&M til the end with one of their McD all americans and best players on the bench. Now A&M didn’t have two of theirs either who come off the bench.

They will be a tourney team pending injuries and pending there will be a tourney.

and if that win wasn’t legit Indiana was...
Click to expand...

That win was legit. Arkansas is just in a rough patch to their schedule. UT, A&M and SC are probably the worst matchups for them due to the size in the post. I think they’re about to rattle off several wins in a row.

They learned a lot in their loss to us that they applied to their game against A&M. Defensively they did a much better job. A&M was pretty frustrated. Arkansas was getting in position and drew a bunch of offensive fouls last night. Something they did not do well against us.

I think they have a good shot at beating SC. With their scoring ability they can beat any given team on any given night. Their defense has to be at least present though. They did not play well defensively against us. Saw a lot more effort on that end last night.

Had Ramirez been available they probably would have won that game. Mason played well in her absence though and it did force Arkansas to go a little bigger at times which they probably needed against A&M with the two bigs in there most of the game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LadyVols_WBK
#32
#32
Spook1 said:
Excellent comments by you. If Kelly would only apply the Rick Barnes method ball control would return quickly. The men only had either 9 or 11 turnovers yesterday. If a mens team player has a turnover in practice, he has to run all the way from the floor to the top of the arena and back...that gets attention quickly.
Click to expand...

I fear if the ladies had to do this practice would be a bust, as most would be running up and down the arena...
 
#34
#34
Remy said:
Gimme a ugly W over a pretty L all day every day.
Click to expand...
I get it, but there are more factors than that.

Is this ugly win over LSU better for the team if they had played South Carolina and were close the entire game before losing by 1 point? What if they shot over 50% from the field and 40% on threes with 21 assists and only 10 turnovers?

Personally, that loss would do more good for the team than the crappy win with 19 turnovers.
 
#35
#35
Bballnut1952 said:
I get it, but there are more factors than that.

Is this ugly win over LSU better for the team if they had played South Carolina and were close the entire game before losing by 1 point? What if they shot over 50% from the field and 40% on threes with 21 assists and only 10 turnovers?

Personally, that loss would do more good for the team than the crappy win with 19 turnovers.
Click to expand...
The "crappy" win is meaningful because a.) they were able to win a conference game on the road when they didn't play that will, but still managed to escape with a win and b.) they would have lost this game the last 7 years.

Don't underestimate the value of grinding out an ugly win.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bret178, travis929, Volfaninfl2 and 9 others
#36
#36
Amb3096 said:
The "crappy" win is meaningful because a.) they were able to win a conference game on the road when they didn't play that will, but still managed to escape with a win and b.) they would have lost this game the last 7 years.

Don't underestimate the value of grinding out an ugly win.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, however, they won several close conference road games against bad teams over the last 7 years, so maybe they would have and maybe they wouldn't have.
 
#37
#37
luballer said:
You do realize the men’s team lost their trap game. They had a big win against Missouri and then looked horrible against Alabama. It was a ugly win but at least the women’s team won.
Click to expand...
You do realize that Alabama is one of the top 3 teams in the SEC so far this year and had a fantastic game plan they executed to perfection.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mcannon1
#38
#38
Amb3096 said:
The "crappy" win is meaningful because a.) they were able to win a conference game on the road when they didn't play that will, but still managed to escape with a win and b.) they would have lost this game the last 7 years.

Don't underestimate the value of grinding out an ugly win.
Click to expand...

A pretty loss might also cost a top 4 coveted spot in the tourney. So i’ll take an ugly win and the fact the players looked bothered after the game let me know they weren’t satisfied (besides jordan was smiling because she didn’t foul out lol)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Amb3096, lvocd and LadyVols_WBK
#41
#41
Bballnut1952 said:
A win is a win is a win. And I’m thrilled they won but...

I’m not so sure about finding a way to win. Once KK gave them a 58-54 lead with 4:57 left in the game, they did more to lose the game than to win the game.

2-7 on Free Throws
2-7 from the field
1 turnover
committed 3 fouls

They were fortunate to win this game. Perform like this against South Carolina, Kentucky, A&M, Mississippi State, and even Alabama and Ole Miss and odds are it’s a loss.

Like I said, Arkansas was a somewhat “fool‘s gold” kind of win as it was a bad match for Arkansas.

Feel free to disagree in a civil manner, but it’s just how I see it.

I really hope I’m wrong but we will see an up and down season the rest of the way.
Click to expand...

I’m not even actually disagreeing but if We were a bad match up for Arky with our length then weren’t they a bad match up for us with quick little guards who can shoot the three? The winner is usually the team that can nullify the other team’s advantage and impose its own strengths the best. I think we did that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bret178, travis929, ChattyVolfan and 3 others
#42
#42
How many FT’s did the Pointer kid miss for LSU. That seemed to be the difference in the game?
 
  • Like
Reactions: mcannon1
#43
#43
Lucy said:
I’m not even actually disagreeing but if We were a bad match up for Arky with our length then weren’t they a bad match up for us with quick little guards who can shoot the three? The winner is usually the team that can nullify the other team’s advantage and impose its own strengths the best. I think we did that.
Click to expand...

That's what I say. Arkansas had similar disadvantages vs. Baylor and TAMU, but pulled out a win and close loss because they did other things right and took advantage of some positive matchups. Tennessee took a lot of those opportunities away from them and nullified their strengths while capitalizing on their own.
 
  • Like
Reactions: travis929 and Only1COJ
#44
#44
PG1 said:
How many FT’s did the Pointer kid miss for LSU. That seemed to be the difference in the game?
Click to expand...

She missed 6. She was 4-10. That really was the difference in the game for them.

Don’t see her FT percentage improving though. She has an ugly looking shot. I’m shocked with Nikki being her aunt that she didn’t develop a better looking shot growing up. They showed her FT motion from the camera under the basket a couple of times. Not pretty.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LadyVols_WBK and mcannon1
#45
#45
I always chuckle when I read arguments for certain wins being somehow lesser for the victor because it was "a bad matchup" for the loser.

I mean, isn't "bad matchup" just another way of saying "the winning team had the players -- either bigger, stronger, faster, more experienced, deeper as a team -- necessary to win the game and the losing team didn't"? Isn't not having a better team, exactly, what made it a "bad matchup" for the loser -- that they were simply the better team to begin with? lol

What if the Los Angeles Lakers were to play and beat Appalachian State? Would that have been simply a matter of "bad matchup," or would it have been the more obvious? That the Lakers are a much, MUUUUUUUUUCH better team than Appy State and got their butts whipped. Silly, silly way to diminish a win for somebody, IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bret178 and VA_VOLFAN
#46
#46
We missed more than our fair share of potentially difference-making free throws, too. Those four misses at the end may have taken time off my life. :oops:
 
  • Like
Reactions: mcannon1
#47
#47
Lucy said:
I’m not even actually disagreeing but if We were a bad match up for Arky with our length then weren’t they a bad match up for us with quick little guards who can shoot the three? The winner is usually the team that can nullify the other team’s advantage and impose its own strengths the best. I think we did that.
Click to expand...

Tennessee used it's quickness along with their length to give Arkansas great trouble. And that showed up in their three point shooting. The long arms of Tennessee's perimeter defenders forced them into 9-30 and their best three point shooter, Dungee was 1-10. And because they are quick enough to handle their penetration the Razorbacks could only shoot 32% from the field.

Similar to the Indiana game where they struggled to make threes.

Any way you look at it, Tennessee was a really tough match up for Arkansas.
 
#48
#48
lvocd said:
I always chuckle when I read arguments for certain wins being somehow lesser for the victor because it was "a bad matchup" for the loser.

I mean, isn't "bad matchup" just another way of saying "the winning team had the players -- either bigger, stronger, faster, more experienced, deeper as a team -- necessary to win the game and the losing team didn't"? Isn't THAT, exactly, what made it a "bad matchup" for the loser -- that they were simply the better team to begin with? lol

What if the Los Angeles Lakers were to play and beat Appalachian State? Would that have been simply a matter of "bad matchup," or would it have been the more obvious? That the Lakers are a much, MUUUUUUUUUCH better team than Appy State and got their butts whipped. Silly, silly way to diminish a win for somebody, IMO.
Click to expand...
Actually, no.

Not sure why you went to such a ridiculous analogy.

I've been watching sports for a long time and match ups are a big reason for teams winning or losing.

And I'm not sure what you all are finding this so insulting. It certainly is not meant that way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mcannon1
#49
#49
Lucy said:
I’m not even actually disagreeing but if We were a bad match up for Arky with our length then weren’t they a bad match up for us with quick little guards who can shoot the three? The winner is usually the team that can nullify the other team’s advantage and impose its own strengths the best. I think we did that.
Click to expand...

This ☝🏽 all of it!
 
  • Like
Reactions: chuckiepoo
#50
#50
lvocd said:
I always chuckle when I read arguments for certain wins being somehow lesser for the victor because it was "a bad matchup" for the loser.

I mean, isn't "bad matchup" just another way of saying "the winning team had the players -- either bigger, stronger, faster, more experienced, deeper as a team -- necessary to win the game and the losing team didn't"? Isn't not having a better team, exactly, what made it a "bad matchup" for the loser -- that they were simply the better team to begin with? lol

What if the Los Angeles Lakers were to play and beat Appalachian State? Would that have been simply a matter of "bad matchup," or would it have been the more obvious? That the Lakers are a much, MUUUUUUUUUCH better team than Appy State and got their butts whipped. Silly, silly way to diminish a win for somebody, IMO.
Click to expand...

haha you went to polar opposites but i get what you are saying lol

it’s what i said earlier people say stuff and criticisms are fair and a part of the game but i think the part that’s annoying (for me) is the end part of but i’m not taking a dig at the win. 😂 it’s hard to explain
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top