DeShields Chooses Tennessee

#51
#51
Amb3096 said:
Where are you getting this from? Izzy averaged about 2.7 turnovers a game.

For anyone that thinks that Izzy's contributions were "not as high as everyone thinks", I would consider what the season would have looked like if Izzy was NOT on the team. Without her, they are a middle tier SEC team.[/QUOT

If you add per forty minutes played she averaged 4.5 turnovers per game. A lot of games she didn't play forty minutes. She had 96 turnovers in 805 minutes. She was second on the team in turnovers per minute played. Jasmine Jones won first place by a large margin.
As far as the season I think it would have been close to the same. She sat out a lot of games in foul trouble. She ended up playing 805 minutes all season. There were games where she was awesome and others where she disappeared or sat out most of the contest. She certainly made a contribution to winning several games.
No way we would have been a second tier team if she wasn't there. We might have been a couple games worse nothing real dramatic as far as record. We won several games where she barely participated because of fouls.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
#52
#52
Volfan2012 said:
Amb3096 said:
Where are you getting this from? Izzy averaged about 2.7 turnovers a game.

For anyone that thinks that Izzy's contributions were "not as high as everyone thinks", I would consider what the season would have looked like if Izzy was NOT on the team. Without her, they are a middle tier SEC team.[/QUOT

If you add per forty minutes played she averaged 4.5 turnovers per game. A lot of games she didn't play forty minutes. She had 96 turnovers in 805 minutes. She was second on the team in turnovers per minute played. Jasmine Jones won first place by a large margin.
As far as the season I think it would have been close to the same. She sat out a lot of games in foul trouble. She ended up playing 805 minutes all season. There were games where she was awesome and others where she disappeared or sat out most of the contest. She certainly made a contribution to winning several games.
No way we would have been a second tier team if she wasn't there. We might have been a couple games worse nothing real dramatic as far as record. We won several games where she barely participated because of fouls.
Click to expand...

Stats per 40 minutes is a meaningless number. Why look at hypothetical numbers when you can look at actual numbers?

I don't know what you saw last year that would indicate that Izzy was inconsistent. She had a huge run of double doubles in a row, and was the best player on the team for most of the season.

She gets a pass in my book because she was the only player on the team that always came to play. I can't imagine how you don't think that she was a major impact player for Tennessee.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#53
#53
Izzy cut down on both her turnovers and fouls as the season went on. I don't think she did anything differently as far as fouls went. The refs just stopped looking for her as much. But despite all of that you would have a hard time arguing she wasn't the best player on the team. She just did too many other things and was relied upon too much for that not to be the case. She simply makes shots none of the other post players can make and the other teams sell out to stop her.

But normalizing for minutes played is obviously the best way to compare stats. It is just flat out stupid to look at points per game when one player gets 5 minutes and another gets 40 minutes of playing time. That tells you nothing about the relative effectiveness of the players. All efficiency stats are broken down per minute. Per possession is probably even better since it allows for different styles of play that may be necessary to win, but I am not sure there is any way to get those stats.
 
#54
#54
Amb3096 said:
Stats per 40 minutes is a meaningless number. Why look at hypothetical numbers when you can look at actual numbers?
Click to expand...

How is it meaningless? The best way to compare numbers and get the best picture is to base the numbers on an even playing field. So either basing a number like turnovers on a per-minute or a per-entire game basis seems logical. Saying "per game" doesn't give the entire picture because every player doesn't play the same amount of minutes. For example, JJ didn't lead the team in turnovers "per game" because she didn't play a lot of minutes, but compared to the amount of minutes she played, she was turning the ball over the most.
 
#55
#55
So of all players to single out you chose the one player that actually did show up and proved to be the team's most valuable and important player. there were so many other players on this team that were inconsistent and failed to showed up all of last season when we needed them to so why aren't you calling them out?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#56
#56
Spacejam said:
So of all players to single out you chose the one player that actually did show up and proved to be the team's most valuable and important player. there were so many other players on this team that were inconsistent and failed to showed up all of last season when we needed them to so why aren't you calling them out?
Click to expand...
It's not about singling people out. Facts are facts, Everyone was so critical of Simmons and Jones last year. The fact remains for as good as Izzy was, she did foul a lot and did have way too many turnovers. Many unforced, I might add
 
#59
#59
Chris89128 said:
It's not about singling people out. Facts are facts, Everyone was so critical of Simmons and Jones last year. The fact remains for as good as Izzy was, she did foul a lot and did have way too many turnovers. Many unforced, I might add
Click to expand...

Not denying that she too turned the ball over but as far as i remember everyone on the team turned the ball over a lot whether forced or unforced, they all had silly passes, they all fouled a lot, so all i'm saying is that it came from the entire team not just one person.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#60
#60
volcrazy89 said:
How is it meaningless? The best way to compare numbers and get the best picture is to base the numbers on an even playing field. So either basing a number like turnovers on a per-minute or a per-entire game basis seems logical. Saying "per game" doesn't give the entire picture because every player doesn't play the same amount of minutes. For example, JJ didn't lead the team in turnovers "per game" because she didn't play a lot of minutes, but compared to the amount of minutes she played, she was turning the ball over the most.
Click to expand...

Because not all minutes are considered equal. I'm sure players like Jordan Reynolds and Nia Moore have impressive per 40 minutes stats, but considering they played mostly mop up duty, then I wouldn't weigh it as heavily as a starter who is playing the majority of her minutes against the best opponents. Besides, just because a player posts gaudy per 40 minutes stats doesn't mean they would actually come anywhere near that if given the opportunity to actually play 40 minutes.

But if you want to play that, then 5 to's per game is a small price to pay for 23.7 ppg and 16.19 rpb.
 
#61
#61
Oh I'm not downing Izzy. She's definitely bringing a lot to the table to where I can overlook the TOs. JJ ... not so much.
 
#62
#62
I certainly wasn't downing Izzy either just pointing out a fact. She has a ways to go like everyone on the roster when it comes to decision making and being an all around player. 35 assist and 96 turnovers is unacceptable for a post player. It really hurts when you see someone like Stephanie Dolson who I don't think has near as much talent as Izzy put up 53 assist and only 41 turnovers in 1280 minutes played. The main point being made is that all our players need a lot of improvement if they are ever gonna smell a final four.
If you were grading our players by efficiency only a couple could make the UConn roster which considering their ratings coming out of high school is horrible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#64
#64
Volfan2012 said:
I certainly wasn't downing Izzy either just pointing out a fact. She has a ways to go like everyone on the roster when it comes to decision making and being an all around player. 35 assist and 96 turnovers is unacceptable for a post player. It really hurts when you see someone like Stephanie Dolson who I don't think has near as much talent as Izzy put up 53 assist and only 41 turnovers in 1280 minutes played. The main point being made is that all our players need a lot of improvement if they are ever gonna smell a final four.
If you were grading our players by efficiency only a couple could make the UConn roster which considering their ratings coming out of high school is horrible.
Click to expand...

The reason Stefanie Dolson puts up better numbers is because she is an all around better player than Izzy Harrison. She would eat up Izzy on offense and defense. I don't see how you can say she's not talented when she was a top 5 WNBA pick.

The rest of it is coaching. UConn always has posts that are good passers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#65
#65
dolson was good because she had Stewart & Kalenna lewis(sp?) to handle the scoring load.

She isn't doing much in the Wnba....
 
#66
#66
gule said:
dolson was good because she had Stewart & Kalenna lewis(sp?) to handle the scoring load.

She isn't doing much in the Wnba....
Click to expand...

Dolson is good because she's a hard worker, has high basketball IQ, is tough and knows how to use her size. Over four years, she could shut down any post player not named Griner. And I'm pretty sure GMs knew they weren't getting 3-for-1 player deal when they were scouting her.

8 pts 8 rbs and 6 assists last WNBA game vs Atlanta and the best center in the WNBA. I'd say that's a good showing. 6.3 pts and 5 rbs is actually pretty good for a rookie WNBA player, but apparently you have different expectations.
 
#67
#67
Amb3096 said:
The reason Stefanie Dolson puts up better numbers is because she is an all around better player than Izzy Harrison. She would eat up Izzy on offense and defense. I don't see how you can say she's not talented when she was a top 5 WNBA pick.

The rest of it is coaching. UConn always has posts that are good passers.
Click to expand...

Her athletic ability compared to Izzy is small. She has developed a lot of basketball skill in four years at UConn. She looked horrible as a freshman then from there on to senior season she improved every season. Izzy has improved since her freshman year as well not at the pace that Dolson improved and that is probably because of coaching.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top