WBB: 2015 MVC Tournament

[1972Shocker]

I am hoping that 3 straight regular season championships and 3 straight Tournament championships finally lays to rest the idea that Jody is overworking the girls, doesn't know how to manage minutes, run practices that are too rigorous, and doesn't play enough people.

Personally, I think the jury is still out on that. The record shows that in 3 of the last 4 years the Shocker women did in fact stumble down the stretch at the end of the regular season. They were fortunate enough the last two seasons to hold on for co-championships.

The most impressive accomplishment in my mind was the 3 consecutive Valley Tournament Titles. That is tough to do. Just ask the Shocker Men.

So what was different about this year's team compared to the prior three years. There is one difference on the Shocker's bench this year as compared to the prior 3 years. Whether that was a factor in the ability of this year's team to sustain their high level play throughout the season I can't say for sure. Just pointing out there was a change.

There is no question that Jody is by far the most successful coach in Lady Shocker history and deserves the appropriate credit. However, I still wonder if the successes of that past 3 years haven't had as much to do with having the best player in school history on the roster as it does with Jody's philosophy and style. Did Jody just happen to catch lighting in a bottle with Alex Harden? Was it Alex's excellence in all phases of the game the key to our success or was it primarily Jody's leadership? Obviously, it was some of both. Which was the most important factor is hard to say. We are going to get that answer beginning next season.

The thing is with how Jody wants her teams to play you would think that building depth would be a priority and an advantage. Next season will be very interesting indeed. If the Shocks finish in the Top 3 of the league next year then, in my mind, I would agree that Jody's approach is solid and sustainable. I am not fully there quite yet.

That said a finish outside of the Top 3 next year will not condemn Jody's approach for me but perhaps some doubt will still linger for me. I think the next 2 to 3 years will tell that story assuming Jody stays around that long. If she takes a new group of players coming in next year and builds them into a Valley champion again in the next 3 years then that would pretty much eliminate any lingering doubts for me. I do think we have a good group of new players coming in next year that will provide a good base on which to rebuild over the next 2 or 3 years.

I do think Jody's approach will keep the Lady Shocks from falling totally out of bed as long as the players buy in and as long as the Shocks can continue to avoid key injuries.

Most coaches say it is more difficult to sustain excellence than it is to build it. Hopefully, Jody will stay around and show us how it's done.

[The Mad Hatter]

Personally, I think the jury is still out on that. The record shows that in 3 of the last 4 years the Shocker women did in fact stumble down the stretch at the end of the regular season. They were fortunate enough the last two seasons to hold on for co-championships.

The most impressive accomplishment in my mind was the 3 consecutive Valley Tournament Titles. That is tough to do. Just ask the Shocker Men.

So what was different about this year's team compared to the prior three years. There is one difference on the Shocker's bench this year as compared to the prior 3 years. Whether that was a factor in the ability of this year's team to sustain their high level play throughout the season I can't say for sure. Just pointing out there was a change.

This argument makes no sense whatsoever. If you want to attribute our stumbles down the stretch in 2013 and 2014 to worn down legs (which already is suspicious due to the MVC tourney success), saying that the use of our bench this year proves that is in fact the opposite of the case. Here are the minute distributions of the past 3 seasons:

2012-13
Minutes per game of top 5:
34
33.2
27
20.3
20

Total minutes per game of top 5:
134.5

Number of players averaging 10+ mpg:
8 (in fact all 8 at 15+ mpg)

2013-14
Minutes per game of top 5:
34.8
30.7
27.3
26.8
24.8

Total minutes per game of top 5:
144.4

Number of players averaging 10+ mpg:
8 (plus 1 at 9.9 mpg)

2014-15
Minutes per game of top 5:
36.6
33.1
32.2
31.5
31.3

Total minutes per game of top 5:
164.7

Number of players averaging 10+ mpg:
7

In other words, our bench has played far less this year than the past two (20+ minutes per game less), yet no collapse down the stretch.

[1972Shocker]

It is not just a physical thing. In fact, the mental state of the players may be just as important as their physical state. Besides no where in my post did I refer to tired legs.

Are you suggesting the Shockers did not stumble down the regular season stretch the 3 previous seasons? The record shows that they did. Exactly why that was the case in those years vs this year I can not say for sure.

[The Mad Hatter]

It is not just a physical thing. In fact, the mental state of the players may be just as important as their physical state. Besides no where in my post did I refer to tired legs.

Then what was your reference to a change in how the bench was used referring to? The only change has been more minutes for the starters.

[1972Shocker]

Then what was your reference to a change in how the bench was used referring to? The only change has been more minutes for the starters.

I am surprised you did not get what I was referring to. Re-read my post. I did not say or even imply there was a change on how the bench was used. I said there was a change ON the bench. I mistakenly assumed most followers of the Lady Shocks would understand that to mean Dana Eikenberg. I suppose that's my fault for making that assumption.

[The Mad Hatter]

I am shocked you did not get what I was referring to. Re-read my post. I did not say or even imply there was a change on how the bench was used. I said there was a change ON the bench. I mistakenly assumed most followers of the Lady Shocks would understand that to mean Dana Eikenberg.

Sorry for the misread that as a reference to the coaching staff when you were responding to an initial post focus on criticisms of too much workload for players.

[1972Shocker]

Sorry for the misread that as a reference to the coaching staff when you were responding to an initial post focus on criticisms of too much workload for players.

That was my fault for not being clearer. My bottom line point is whether the success of the past 3 years is due to a unique player or perhaps set of players, but in particular Alex Harden, or to the philosophy, style and approach of Coach Adams. They probably go hand in hand but it is not totally clear to me that is the case. Sort of a nature vs nurture argument I guess.

Jody has the opportunity going forward to show that her system is solid and sustainable. Maybe we have another Alex Harden on the horizon but I kind of doubt it so a continued run of success will remove any doubts about Jody and her approach (at least for me). I understand there are probably very few other Shocker fans who share these lingering questions at this point and that is fine. Personally, I hope Jody proves that my doubts are unfounded.

[tgcshock]

I could certainly have used the release of Dana as yet another evidence of Jody's growth as a coach. Clearly, success is difficult to sustain. Clearly having Alex made a difference. And at a high major program with a ton of tradition it might even be possible to win championships on occasion in spite of a coach with some deficiencies. To do what Jody has done in forging a winning program here just makes it hard for me to dismiss the primary role she has had in our success. Even more than this, the fact that she has specifically and intentionally modeled herself after the way Pat Summit coached makes a difference. Maybe it is just a odd coincidence that the Summit way of doing things worked here as well as at Tennessee. The more obvious implication would be that coaching trees matter in college basketball and that winning systems should be imitated more frequently than they are criticized. (And, the fact that Jody saw more potential in Alex then many other coaches did and convinced her to come here and coached her up shouldn't be overlooked when assigning credit)

At the end of the day though, I agree that winning a championship in the next 3-4 years is the best way to settle how much might have been Alex and how much was Jody. Hope we have several championships in our near future and can put all doubt to rest.

[The Mad Hatter]

The big thing for me, aside from the steady build of the program before Alex with players like Haleigh, Jessie, Chynna, Jaz, etc., is the fact that I watched the WSU teams with Angela Buckner and Jennifer Kazcka and it instilled pretty deep in me that having an elite player (and while I would rank Alex above those two, they are all in a special class) doesn't mean a whole lot if the coaching isn't there.

[1972Shocker]

The next step for the program is to win a game or 2 in the NCAA Tournament. It is a very tough thing to do for Valley teams considering the low seeds that are usually handed out. I really do think we be better than a 13 seed this year. I could see us has high as a 10, but no lower than a 12.

I think one big reason we were a 13 seed last year is that we lost 4 of our last 6 regular season games. That did not happen this year plus I think we had a tougher non-con schedule this year.

That would certainly help us accomplish the goal of winning at least one game in the NCAA Tournament. Probably doesn't make much difference after Round 1, the next Round will be tough regardless of seeding.

[The Mad Hatter]

I really hope that we are given a reasonable seed this year (the men's selection committee isn't making me feel to optimistic on that front). I also hope that we don't have the officiating rip off of last year on our hands again.

I pretty much agree with the 10 to 12 seed range (if it were perfectly accurate, I would put us as either the last 10 or first 11 seed).

[1972Shocker]

I would like to see the Valley improve on its conference RPI and Power Rankings from around 19th or 20th the past two years depending on what service you look at. The Valley was consistently around 10th the 4 or 5 year's previous to this drop off over the last couple of years. Not sure about prior to that.

The quality at the top of the league is not looking too bad, but the bottom half of the league has really struggled and made it very, very difficult for schools in the top half of the league to maintain a good RPI. When you have 6 to 8 games a year locked in that hurt your RPI even if you win that is a tough row to hoe. A lot of weeds to dig through.

[1972Shocker]

I also hope that we don't have the officiating rip off of last year on our hands again.

I really thought that "phantom" call on Michaela at the end of the game was glossed over and not really questioned by anyone. I would certainly love to see what the refs allegedly saw to make the call that they made. I saw nothing on the TV replays that were shown that indicated Michaela touched that ball.

[The Mad Hatter]

I really thought that "phantom" call on Michaela at the end of the game was glossed over and not really questioned by anyone. I would certainly love to see what the refs allegedly saw to make the call that they made. I saw nothing on the TV replays that were shown that indicated Michaela touched that ball.

In fact, if anything, the reply made it MORE clear that she didn't touch it than in real time.

[1972Shocker]

In fact, if anything, the reply made it MORE clear that she didn't touch it than in real time.

I agree, at least the replays that were shown to the viewing public. I was left thinking the refs had to see something that was not shown to the viewing public to make the call they did.