Small bench

I’m normally on here wishing we could go deeper with our bench, but I gotta say that Notre Dame is making a strong case for a small bench. They have almost no bench and knocked off #6Tennessee and then crushed #8 FSU. Might be there’s something to say for 5 players knowing upfront they have to play 40 strong.

 

You often hear that using a lot of players keeps everyone's legs fresh,and with lots of energy. These teams where almost all the players play almost all the time and still come out with great wins makes me questions that theory. Of course, for more slow down games, understandable, but UConn and ND don't play slow down games.

 

The short benches are not by design. ND and UConn are one injury away from being in deep dog poo. One reason Geno is trying everything he can to get his bench players up to snuff. ND simply has had too many injuries to have a deep bench.

 

I"m not advocating short benches. I'm just saying a lot of teams do very well with a short rotation. Surprising the number of players who go for 30 something minutes, if not the full 40 (e.g., Brooke has often done this).

 

Yes. I am aware of the reasons and with ND many thought their season would suffer and yet they had a record comeback game against #6 Tenn and a blowout against #8 FSU. It’s an interesting case study. While I have wanted Karen to go deep, I also get frustrated that we seem to lack consistency not only from game to game but quarter to quarter. Or maybe Muffet and Geno simply know how to get more from less. Still

 

I’m a person that believes playing your best players has much as possible. Having a short bench also creates continuity between the players on the floor. And don’t be fooled, Geno doesn’t care about getting his bench players more playing time. Him stating so is just for recruiting.

 

I like the idea of being able to wear down the opponent with depth, but only with the most talented depth and I DO NOT AGREE with jerking players in and out the whole game disrupting flow and continuity.

 

I can definitely say from experience that short benches are better than deeper ones. Especially with the way we play. If we were a more aggressive pressing/trapping team, then a deep bench is helpful. But if players know upfront that they are going to play the entire game, the mindset/production is completely different.

 

Well when you have a coach that can coach it doesn't matter how deep or short the bench is. They make it work. They understand their's players strengths and weaknesses as well as the team's strength's and weaknesses. They develop a plan to maximize their talent. They make changes during the game and at half time to counter whatever is thrown at them. And they SCOUT SCOUT SCOUT their opponent.

Muffet classic example. Injury after injury and she adjusted. It took her what a game or two to figure it out. It's like they didn't miss a beat. I love Muffet's defense. Remember when she had Diggins they were giving Geno & UCONN a run for their money.

Geno another example. Remember when the Seniors graduated, B Stewart, MJefferson and the other girl's name escapes me and "supposedly" they were going to have a down year. BAM they made it to the semi Final Four game before losing last year. He's another master mind when it comes to defense. He understands what scheme to use to cripple his opponent.

So to me it bowls down to coaching. And if memory serves me correctly Geno always plays 6 or 7. I don't think he goes beyond 7 most of the time. The bench might get garbage minutes but not really. He keeps his starting 5 in 39.999 minutes. LOL!!!

 

From my observation, it seems that a seven to eight player regular rotation generally works. Once a team starts getting talented depth, a roster of thirteen scholarship players should allow for injuries, transfers, and player development most years. In addition to keeping players fresh, good depth allows a coach to give an opponent different looks and to sit players (even if only briefly) who are not performing well for any reason on a given night. I thought Texas used its depth well against ISU. The starting five seemed stagnant if not sluggish. Karen brought in Holmes and Hosey and the team played much faster and more effectively. I think Geno might wish he had a couple of better options off his bench this year. Uconn might not make it past a couple of teams such as Baylor and MsSt in a row. UConn has to worry more about matchups than in other years. A lot may depend on Stevens.

 

Predominant is that coaches think 8 is the sweet spot for efficient and productive rotations. If no one ever got injured or in foul trouble and they didn’t have to worry about feelings, that would be the number. But life and coaching is messy.

 

Every game situation is different. Foul trouble, matchups, opponent competiveness, and player fatigue kind of dictate the substitution patterns.

In our game against ISU, I was surprised that Brooke, Ariel, and Lashann were still in the game late I the fourth quarter with a 20+ point lead. But, not having Chasity and Destiny at 100% health probably had something to do with that.

Still, I cringe when our most valuable players are still on the court late in the game during a blowout win as fluke injuries can happen at any time.