Elizabethton Lady Cyclones

[screenandroll]

Like I questioned earlier, would the Lady Cyclones be able to handle pressure on the ball. Sure maybe full court if they bring the big kids up, but how about in the half court. Can't afford to bring the big kids away from the goal.

Maybe the other player for TA Dugger might have helped some, but again same situation. If you can't get the ball to them, then they can't be very effective.

[coachh17]

It is no doubt a weakness for both TAD and EHS. I think Coach Weems will be able to figure out a way to overcome it. I'm not close enough to the TAD program to adequately assess the problem or possible solutions.

[GLee]

What's the deal with Betsy's bench? They seem to spank the starters in practice pretty often...........or am I hearing wrong?

[coachh17]

I can't say since I'm no longer able to see it. Questions about the bench were raised after the sub's bout of turnoveritis in the Jamboree. The kids on the bench have talent and if they take care of the ball they will earn more time, making this a deeper team.

[krichunaka]

There seems a tendency by so many coaches, and fans, to refer to "the bench," as a "second unit," or "group", which is most-often to the "team's" detriment. We discussed this at length last season.

 

I think that Coach Weems, like the best in the business at this, Coach Chambers and Coach Fisher, will find the best chemistry. Subbing is a Huge and Critical part of Coaching; it's an art. Also, I think that Coach Weems was simply making sure that EVERYONE was rewarded for their efforts in Summer and Pre-season.

 

There is, or should be, a lot of emphasis on this by a good staff. And to give "17" a little credit (don't worry, I'll delete later), I'm told he was very good at this. "osubrutus" was outstanding.

 

I think that that, substitutions, will determine how effectively Cameron, Brianna, Hannah, Victoria, "K C" and Jones (did I say "K C Jones"?), et al will contribute to this Very Deep club.

 

Any thoughts, osu, 17, writestuff, GLee, coachescorner ....anyone?

Edited November 17, 2005 by krichunaka

[GLee]

I can't say since I'm no longer able to see it. Questions about the bench were raised after the sub's bout of turnoveritis in the Jamboree. The kids on the bench have talent and if they take care of the ball they will earn more time, making this a deeper team.

 

 

I think there was a very 'enlightening' scrimmage Wed. The outcome should have opened some eyes as far as the subs are concerned. I have felt for a couple of years that this year's group could be special because of TEAM PLAY. Maybe I am wrong........I quite often am.........????? I hope that a couple don't ruin the TEAM concept of the game for all of the girls. They should be pretty good for a few years if they can keep them all together playing as a team.

[CycloneFan]

coachh17, GLee and krich you are all correct. I think all the younger kids need is experience. No doubt a couple of the young ones showed their nerves in the jamboree the other night. That was to be expected cause it was their first taste of varsity action (excluding summer league and scrimmages of course). It was also all the kids' first action in a live game situation with their new coach, and frankly about all of them showed some nerves.

The main difference between numbers 1 through 11 on this team is not talent. Its experience. They did have a battle in practice yesterday. The so called starters and the number 12 varsity player played the numbers 6-11, and 6-11 jumped on them early sprinting out to a double digit lead in the first qtr. The 1-5,12 team regrouped and caught, tied and passed the 6-11 in the second qtr, and the 6-11 responded with a late 3 to tie the game at the end of two. In the extra period (a couple minutes I think) the 1-5,12 group ended up ahead but only by a couple. I was not there but have heard virtually the same storyline from two player sources, one from each side. Glee did you see the scrimmage? Does your info jive with mine?

BTW, the so called 1-5,12 are one senior, and the five juniors; the 6-11 are one senior, four sophs and one freshman.

[GLee]

coachh17, GLee and krich you are all correct. I think all the younger kids need is experience. No doubt a couple of the young ones showed their nerves in the jamboree the other night. That was to be expected cause it was their first taste of varsity action (excluding summer league and scrimmages of course). It was also all the kids' first action in a live game situation with their new coach, and frankly about all of them showed some nerves.

The main difference between numbers 1 through 11 on this team is not talent. Its experience. They did have a battle in practice yesterday. The so called starters and the number 12 varsity player played the numbers 6-11, and 6-11 jumped on them early sprinting out to a double digit lead in the first qtr. The 1-5,12 team regrouped and caught, tied and passed the 6-11 in the second qtr, and the 6-11 responded with a late 3 to tie the game at the end of two. In the extra period (a couple minutes I think) the 1-5,12 group ended up ahead but only by a couple. I was not there but have heard virtually the same storyline from two player sources, one from each side. Glee did you see the scrimmage? Does your info jive with mine?

BTW, the so called 1-5,12 are one senior, and the five juniors; the 6-11 are one senior, four sophs and one freshman.

 

No, I didn't see the scrimmage and have not seen them at all this year. Only the forbidden 'hearsay', BUT I have followed these girls thru thier years at Elizabethton and have always been impressed by all of them, even with 17 as a coach The info you have seems to be very close to the version I was told. Point being, with just a tad bit more experience for the younger players, this could be the deepest team the Cyclones have ever had and they are still pretty young as a whole. IF they play as a team, they will be hard to handle for a couple of years. TEAM is a very key word here because they don't have a '23' to ride any more. Hearing that a few have quit is disheartening, but as a coach, I would have to believe that those were the ones who needed to go, talent or not. The ones who stick it out are the TEAM.

 

Can't wait to see them in action and then I'll be able to be real stupid on here.

[coachh17]

Krich,

Some thoughts on depth. In a perfect world you wouldn't need any. You could have your top five in great shape, playing an up-tempo style for 32 minutes at 110%. However, we don't live in a perfect world. Illness, foul trouble, injury, emergecies, poor conditioning, and emotions see to that. To be a great team you have to have quality depth. At a minimum, an 8 person rotation is required. That is a backup point guard, a backup wing, and a backup post. Specialist like three point shooters, stopper defenders, enforcers, and ball-handlers can also win games in certain situations. Successful coaches are masters of developing depth and convincing players that their role is critical to the teams success, no matter how small that role may be. Just giving minutes to bench players just to give them minutes doesn't work. They have to have a purpose defined by their role. The more players you give a role to, that they believe in and accept, the better your team will be. The coach also has to believe in these players and their roles and use them in situations that give them and the team the best chance to succeed.

[coachh17]

Hey boys, I could use some help on the Public vs. Private Split thread on the Public vs. Private Debate forum if you don't mind.

[coachh17]

Thanks GLee!

[GLee]

Thanks GLee!

 

 

That wasn't much. I read some of the 'stuff' but my brain went in overload and I settled on the statement you read. Let me know when you need another 'hit'.