i know lutz is not popular here...

[shockedatu]

Thank you Shocker Lady for the voice of reason.

[wsubballfan]

Went to Valleytalk to read the posts about "what's happened to Shocker ball" and then went to the taped coaches call on the MVC site to listen to Jane's portion of the call. I would suggest it for those undecided about whether to believe her when she says she "gets it now".

I, myself, was disappointed. Unlike some of you, I am not a foot-stomping Kiki fan. She's a decent player. I actually think she is better when her game is not centered on creating her own shot. I think our team is betterr when that happens. Kiki is not the only one with the "keep the ball" message. The conference is calling our players "selfish". It is obvious that Kyrie, Daria, and Jacie as well as Kiki have all been told to dribble penetrate and shoot. Some are better at it than others. But, there is not an emphasis on teamwork.

Jane did say they are a better team with Whitney on the floor and some of you agree. But, Jane couldn't describe why and most of you have called it court savvy and leadership. I propose it is a shift in the game called teamwork. Whitney is a good passer. Her court vision is wide and deep and her timing is quick - sometimes too quick for her teammates.

Here's what I think is happening and what Jane doesn't "get". When you have a good passing guard on the court, her teammates learn to always be ready for the ball (sometimes they aren't and the passer gets the penalty turnover and we definitely experience this problem but anyway....). When you only have penetrators on the floor, teammates become spectators. They also become aware of whether they are touching the ball so that when they do, they are more hesitant to give it up. They start creating on their own and forcing shots. They only pass when they are in trouble usually in our case very, very deep trouble - in fact, we usually walk first. The defense gets used to this style of play as well. Defenders are allowed to swarm the ball (when they aren't resting) and it is evident that the WSU players aren't counting hands when they put up shots and a pass is the last option.

But, you put a passer on the floor for a decent length of time (not 4 min in and time's up, you sit) and your teammates start realizing "Hey, she's looking for me". If they aren't open or don't have good options, they are willing to give up the ball because they develop a confidence they will get it back when they are. They even start looking for other teammates. The shift then happens in the defense - "Hey we can't just focus on the person with the ball - they may actually pass it". The ball starts zipping from one side of the floor to the other, inside AND OUT (imagine that!!) and the defense is moving and even getting tired which might actually take away from their offense. Fans quit screaming "Pass the ball", "Move", and "You missed her" - the three Shocker favorites this year.

Next thing you know you've got a 16% shooter going 40% because she took wide open shots not forced-up prayers. Her confidence didn't magically or prayerfully increase. It was a better shot. She got her feet and hands set, looked at the goal and took the shot that I would bet Jane talks about them taking in practices.

Do I have any proof of this? Well, the only winning season came with Rice at the point. Last year as she got healthier and played more minutes, they got more competitive though Jane never realized it. This year, it looks like the same thing may happen. It doesn't have to be Rice specifically but I think it does have to be her mentatlity. I remember last year when that stats student was posting stuff, 72shocker said it mattered who was on the floor with Taylor and Whitney more. I went and looked at one game and counted. During Taylor's 26 minutes, she played with four unique line-ups; Whitney played 14 minutes and there were 18, yes 18, different line-ups on the floor and as a team, they were more productive with Whitney in the game. I thought it was a fluke but after reading what everyone has posted, I think I may get what has been going on.

Kiki's numbers haven't changed dramatically from year to year - she isn't the key cog that translates to victories. And, obviously Jane's hype of Jacie was premature.

But Jane has said she wants a Kiki on the floor all the time and she wants a shoot-first point guard. This may well be where the accusations of favoritism are fueled. Kiki can miss her first four or five shots in a game and she isn't pulled - she plays until she does or doesn't find her rhythm. Other players don't get that consideration - most of them are pulled after 2 misses even if their 4 or 7 minutes aren't up. Jacie's playing time or starting hasn't been penalized for her lack of personal or team production. But, Taylor had three games her sophomore year before Whitney took her spot and Whitney had three her sophomore year before Taylor took it back. With no threat of being benched like the others play under, why would anyone expect improvement from Jacie or Kiki?

So, in a nutshell, while Jane can't explain why her team shot better when Kiki had 24 points other than that they must have relaxed, I'm understanding Rice's comment in the Eagle after the game more. You put a passer on the floor that changed the flavor of the game. Others became passers too and it allowed players to get better shots and the defense even opened up to allow Kiki to get more points. I question the Eagle's coverage of Jacie's confidence returning because Jane told her to keep shooting as being a factor. She walked twice in the first half because she tried to take off dribbling. She hit 2 of 5 shots (nothing to brag about but apparently a blessing for her) when she shot off the pass. We ended the game with more assists as a team than we've seen all year.

Until Jane can actually see what makes a difference and verbalize it, I question her ability to implement change. I've said all along I thought she had the experience to turn this program around. But if that experience only includes building a program around a Jordan-like player, then there are two problems. 1) Kiki and Jacie aren't Jordan-like and their teammates can't buy into pretending they are. 2) Jane doesn't want to hear and refuses to see they aren't Jordan-like.

It is probably too late to teach Kiki about a give and go or a feed and refeed. But, if the rest of the team could buy into the concept of teamwork and develop a network of trust in spite of their head coach, they might be able to win a few more. Then, all they will have to do is stomach Jane's version of why it happened.

[ballerfan]

:clap: wsubballfan I applaud you! You have in my opinion accurately and tactfully summed up this situation. I posted earlier that I beleive we are a better team with Whitney on the floor, I still contend that we are. You cannot have a point guard who averages more TO than A. You have to have someone at the point who allows teammates to play the game with them. Be the point Whitney or Taylor you have to have someone who can and will distribute the ball!!

[futureCPA]

Teamwork seems to have always been an on-and-off problem with this coach. Where's the consistency? The players may not necessarily be selfish, but if there is a hint of selfishness in them, the environment certainly doesn't stifle it. It could be a problem of players not knowing what their roles are because they change every day! Imagine starting one game and then playing 7 minutes the next. Or if you're the go-to player one day and then benched the next.

When players don't have a solid idea of their roles, they are constantly having to "prove themselves". This could lead to ill-advised shots and over-penetration. When the coach is changing her mind on the roles constantly, the players can never be expected to know! I also believe in earning your role, through weeks/months of solid production and effort, but she seems to award playing time on a whim!

[futureCPA]

Went to Valleytalk to read the posts about "what's happened to Shocker ball" and then went to the taped coaches call on the MVC site to listen to Jane's portion of the call. I would suggest it for those undecided about whether to believe her when she says she "gets it now".

I, myself, was disappointed. Unlike some of you, I am not a foot-stomping Kiki fan. She's a decent player. I actually think she is better when her game is not centered on creating her own shot. I think our team is betterr when that happens. Kiki is not the only one with the "keep the ball" message. The conference is calling our players "selfish". It is obvious that Kyrie, Daria, and Jacie as well as Kiki have all been told to dribble penetrate and shoot. Some are better at it than others. But, there is not an emphasis on teamwork.

Jane did say they are a better team with Whitney on the floor and some of you agree. But, Jane couldn't describe why and most of you have called it court savvy and leadership. I propose it is a shift in the game called teamwork. Whitney is a good passer. Her court vision is wide and deep and her timing is quick - sometimes too quick for her teammates.

Here's what I think is happening and what Jane doesn't "get". When you have a good passing guard on the court, her teammates learn to always be ready for the ball (sometimes they aren't and the passer gets the penalty turnover and we definitely experience this problem but anyway....). When you only have penetrators on the floor, teammates become spectators. They also become aware of whether they are touching the ball so that when they do, they are more hesitant to give it up. They start creating on their own and forcing shots. They only pass when they are in trouble usually in our case very, very deep trouble - in fact, we usually walk first. The defense gets used to this style of play as well. Defenders are allowed to swarm the ball (when they aren't resting) and it is evident that the WSU players aren't counting hands when they put up shots and a pass is the last option.

But, you put a passer on the floor for a decent length of time (not 4 min in and time's up, you sit) and your teammates start realizing "Hey, she's looking for me". If they aren't open or don't have good options, they are willing to give up the ball because they develop a confidence they will get it back when they are. They even start looking for other teammates. The shift then happens in the defense - "Hey we can't just focus on the person with the ball - they may actually pass it". The ball starts zipping from one side of the floor to the other, inside AND OUT (imagine that!!) and the defense is moving and even getting tired which might actually take away from their offense. Fans quit screaming "Pass the ball", "Move", and "You missed her" - the three Shocker favorites this year.

Next thing you know you've got a 16% shooter going 40% because she took wide open shots not forced-up prayers. Her confidence didn't magically or prayerfully increase. It was a better shot. She got her feet and hands set, looked at the goal and took the shot that I would bet Jane talks about them taking in practices.

Do I have any proof of this? Well, the only winning season came with Rice at the point. Last year as she got healthier and played more minutes, they got more competitive though Jane never realized it. This year, it looks like the same thing may happen. It doesn't have to be Rice specifically but I think it does have to be her mentatlity. I remember last year when that stats student was posting stuff, 72shocker said it mattered who was on the floor with Taylor and Whitney more. I went and looked at one game and counted. During Taylor's 26 minutes, she played with four unique line-ups; Whitney played 14 minutes and there were 18, yes 18, different line-ups on the floor and as a team, they were more productive with Whitney in the game. I thought it was a fluke but after reading what everyone has posted, I think I may get what has been going on.

Kiki's numbers haven't changed dramatically from year to year - she isn't the key cog that translates to victories. And, obviously Jane's hype of Jacie was premature.

But Jane has said she wants a Kiki on the floor all the time and she wants a shoot-first point guard. This may well be where the accusations of favoritism are fueled. Kiki can miss her first four or five shots in a game and she isn't pulled - she plays until she does or doesn't find her rhythm. Other players don't get that consideration - most of them are pulled after 2 misses even if their 4 or 7 minutes aren't up. Jacie's playing time or starting hasn't been penalized for her lack of personal or team production. But, Taylor had three games her sophomore year before Whitney took her spot and Whitney had three her sophomore year before Taylor took it back. With no threat of being benched like the others play under, why would anyone expect improvement from Jacie or Kiki?

So, in a nutshell, while Jane can't explain why her team shot better when Kiki had 24 points other than that they must have relaxed, I'm understanding Rice's comment in the Eagle after the game more. You put a passer on the floor that changed the flavor of the game. Others became passers too and it allowed players to get better shots and the defense even opened up to allow Kiki to get more points. I question the Eagle's coverage of Jacie's confidence returning because Jane told her to keep shooting as being a factor. She walked twice in the first half because she tried to take off dribbling. She hit 2 of 5 shots (nothing to brag about but apparently a blessing for her) when she shot off the pass. We ended the game with more assists as a team than we've seen all year.

Until Jane can actually see what makes a difference and verbalize it, I question her ability to implement change. I've said all along I thought she had the experience to turn this program around. But if that experience only includes building a program around a Jordan-like player, then there are two problems. 1) Kiki and Jacie aren't Jordan-like and their teammates can't buy into pretending they are. 2) Jane doesn't want to hear and refuses to see they aren't Jordan-like.

It is probably too late to teach Kiki about a give and go or a feed and refeed. But, if the rest of the team could buy into the concept of teamwork and develop a network of trust in spite of their head coach, they might be able to win a few more. Then, all they will have to do is stomach Jane's version of why it happened.

By the way, I LOVE that post! So true, so true....

[1972Shocker]

I have to agree that the Shockers offense during most of Jane's tenure has tended to be pretty stagnant with a lot of dribbling and standing around.

I will say that against Missouri State the team had some of the best teamwork, ball movement and player movement that I can remember during Jane's tenure. This was the Shocks first game of the year with a positive assist to turnover ratio. They also had a 15 assist-15 turnover game vs Winthrop. Last year we had 8 games with a 1 to 1 ratio or better.

How much of the blame should be attributed to installing an inexperienced Jacie Hoyt as the starting point guard is hard to say, but I think it definitely has had an impact. This year Taylor has the best assist to turnover ratio at 33-33, Whitney follows at 31-32 and Jacie is at 45-66. Actually this ratio for these three players is not that bad at 0.832 when you compare it to the team ratio of 0.506. The bottom line is we are getting too many turnovers from other players also.

Kiki, Kyrie, Marcy and Daria have 66 assists and 194 turnovers this year for a 0.340 ratio. Not that you expect a lot of assists from these positions, but sure would be nice to cut down on the turnovers.

Jane's teams have averaged 13.1 assists per game vs our opponents who have averaged 13.7 assists per game. Jane's teams have assisted on 21.7% of the teams FGA's and 53.8% of the FGM's. Opponents have assisted on 22.6% of the FGA's and 54.5% of their FGM's. Looked at in isolation our assist totals don't look too bad relative to our opponents.

Jane's teams have averaged 20.5 turnovers per game vs 17.1 for our opponents. Therefore, our poor assist to turnover ratio 64% to our opponents 80% is mostly due to turning the ball over too much.
Why that is, exactly, I do not know.

In Jane's 5-years her teams assist to turnover ratios are as follows:

2003-04: 14.3/20.2 = 0.708
2004-05: 12.9/22.7 = 0.568
2005-06: 14.2/20.5 = 0.693
2006-07: 13.2/19.7 = 0.670
2007-08: 9.9/19.6 = 0.505

This year with Jacie starting at the point, and again it may not be solely her fault, we have the poorest ratio in Jane's tenure.

For reference Illinois State leads the MVC with a team assist to turnover ratio of 1.40, although they are the only MVC team with a ratio above 1.
The Shocks are last in the league in assists and last in turnovers, which obviously makes us last in assist to turnover ratio. We are also last in turnover margin at -4.19. Creighton is 9th at -2.60. Evansville leads the MVC at +4.55.

Tisharria Huggnis led the 2003-04 team with 105/75 = 1.40 ratio.
Taylor Steven led the young 2004-05 team with a 93/103 = 0.903 ratio.
Whitney Rice in her most healthy year led the 2005-06 team with a 111/107=1.04 ratio.
Lexee McDonell at 73/50=1.46 had the best ratio on the 2006-07 team, followed by Taylor at 80/68=1.18 and Whitney at 76/88=0.864.

High turnovers have plagued Jane's teams throughout her tenure and it does not seem to be improving much. This year we continue to turn the ball over at a high rate and our assists have dropped off. Hindsight is 20-20 but Jane made a big bet installing a relatively inexperienced Jacie Hoyt at starting point guard and it has not worked out too well. Of course, Whitney's leg injuries may have forced her hand somewhat, but her most experienced point guard Taylor Steven was healthy. I think Jane just made up her mind that changes had to be made for change sake, and, so far it has not worked out too well.

In the Missouri State game, where the Shocks looked better with their offensive movement Jacie had 0 assists and 2 turnovers; Whitney was 6 and 2, Taylor was 4-2 and Frannie was 5-2 (in only ten minutes). Overall very good production from the guards (15/8=1.875). Interestingly, Whitney played 31 minutes, the most of the guards so maybe Whitney's is finally feeling better and we will see more PT going forward.

Still I think it will be hard to win consistently if we continue to average 20 turnovers a game which is where we have been pretty much stuck during Jane's tenure. Whether that's due to nature (players) or nurture (coaching) I'm not sure. Pehaps a combination of both.

[SubGod22]

We'd be better if Whitney would/could practice more.

[1972Shocker]

There is no doubt that our issues this year are mostly on the offensive side of the ball. Based on the MVC stats through 02/04/08 here is where we stand (MVC Games Only):

Scoring Offense: #10 - 55.3 PPG
Scoring Defense: #10 - 71.4 PPG
Scoring Margin: #10 - (16.1) PPG


Free Throw %: #7 - 69.3%
Field Goal %: #10 - 34.7%
Field Goal % Defense: #4 - 40.4%
3-Point FG %: #10 - 19.6%
3-Point FG % Defense: #6 - 33.2%
3-Point FG Made: #10 - 2.11 PG

Total Rebounds Made: #3 - 40.1 PG
Total Rebounds Allowed: #10 - 42.7 PG
Rebounding Margin: #8 - (2.6) PG
Offensive Rebounds: #4 - 13.00 PG
Defensive Rebounds: #3 - 27.11 PG

Blocked Shots: #1 - 4.11 PG
Steals: #5 - 6.78 PG

Assists: #10 - 9.22 PG
Turnovers: #9 - 18.2 PG
Turnover Margin: #9 - (3.67) PG
Assist/Turnvoer Ratio: #10 - 0.51

While our turnovers are an issue, we are also not exactly lighting it up scoring wise. Again, a lot of that may have to do with the stagnant offense. #10 in scoring, #10 in FG % #10 in 3-Pt FG %, #7 in Free Throw % and #10 in 3-Pt FG Made (at 2.11 PG - #9 Bradley is at 4.11 PG).

Where the turnovers may hurt is in our scoring defense which is also last in the league. Not sure how many of those turnovers are turned into points. In any case, so far this year has been a struggle for the Lady Shocks.

[1972Shocker]

We'd be better if Whitney would/could practice more.

Yes, you have to feel for Whitney. She has had a tough couple of years.

[1972Shocker]

wsubballfan, that was a very interesting and well-thought out post about the Shockers lack of teamwork and their offensive problems.

I don't know if you agree or not, but the teamwork and offensive movement looked pretty good agains Missouri State. The question is, was this an aberration or are they in fact figuring out that the teamwork approach you outlined in your psot is the most effective way to go.

The rest of the season should give us some indication.

I don't know if Whitney is the key or not, but she may very well be. Hopefully, her legs are up to more minutes the rest of the year.

[wsubballfan]

72shocker - I do agree we looked better against Mo State and it made me really want to hear what Jane saw. And, I am in no way implying it was solely because of Whitney but rather the general attitude that a passing guard brings to the game. I am completely disappointed in Jane's reaction to the game just days after two seething articles in the press where she claims to "get it". In the Eagle, she said Jacie's shots fell because she told her to keep shooting. She can't tell the difference between wide open threes and defended underhanded over the head prayers? On the conference call, she said the players relaxed because Kiki had 24 points and that's why they made their shots. She gave no credit at all to the ball movement and unselfish play that led to assists not just by Whitney but by everyone. In fact, go listen she says things like "I can't explain it" repeatedly.

I know it was a long post and I apologize for not knowing how to be brief but the conference call just irked me. She's trying to claim she gets it now. But, the first successful game after those public statements she says stuff like that????

subgod22, I'm sure for the rest of the team, it would be better if Whitney could practice more (not sure of your implications about "would") but you could easily argue that practicing when she shouldn't have been is exactly what slowed her healing. After all, six weeks from Labor Day is mid-October.

[ballerfan]

the real question is has Jane figured out that the key is teamwork = success.

[wsubballfan]

I guess what I'm saying is we have that answer and it is apparently not. Otherwise the things she said publicly after the game in the Eagle or on the conference call would have been about teamwork, passing, better shots, etc. They weren't. They were only about Jacie (in the Eagle) and Kiki (on the call). She was specifically asked "What was the difference?" and she talks about having a primary scorer in Kiki and confidence.......nothing about teamwork or passing or ball movement. It is clear to me she did not see the difference that some of us saw. Here's the link ...... just listen to it.

http://www.mvc.org/audio/wbb/WSU_F5.wma?DB_OEM_ID=7600

[futureCPA]

I don't know if she'd mention the real reasons (teamwork, etc.) even if they were staring her in the face. I'd like to see what her reaction would be if a reporter blantantly asked/said, "You don't think any of the (projected win) has anything to do with teamwork?"

Then maybe...just maybe... she'll insightfully reply, "Why yes!"

[futureCPA]

Then maybe she can use some quotes from wsubballfan's post to dress up her response a little! ;-)

Just don't forget to cite!