The Liz Kitley Effect
As I read all of the portal discussion, I'm taken by the number of comments about very tall players. That's understandable, we were blessed for 5 years with a very tall woman who had great footwork, an outstanding shooting touch out to 15 feet, rebounded very well, had a high basketball IQ, was in excellent physical condition, and was a charismatic fan magnet. She was called a "generational player", which means if we wait another 20-30 years we'll get another one of those.
Yes, she happened to be very tall, but as mentioned above she had many other attributes that made her special to us. Just finding someone else tall won't bring along all of those other attributes. I don't see anyone in the portal that looks like that.
We have some outstanding coaches, who seem to want to play fast, play tough defense, and switch on every pick. We also have some very good returning players, who now have a full year of playing experience. They didn't get that under the prior system.
UConn crushed USCe with a lineup that mostly stayed at 6'2" or under. Their leading rebounder was a 6'2" Freshman that pulled 15 boards. They put great pressure on the ball making entry passes difficult. When a USCe big actually did get the ball, the offside help put them in a bad spot. That sounds like what I perceive our coaches are going for.
We already have a mostly fast team, with more speed coming in. If we can get a couple more players that can play fast and hard, we'll have the depth to win. I think our women were on rubber legs by the end of the season. Their defense got more passive, and their shooting suffered for tired legs. Toward the end of the season, they routinely faded in the 4th quarter. We need more bodies to play that fast, and I hope we get them.
With a few more subs, and more good coaching, I think we can be in the top half of the ACC and make the NCAA tournament.
I hope I'm right.
22 Replies
1y
I'd rather have some good 6-2, 6-3 players than average 6-5, 6-6 players. Liz Kitley was special, but she's a unicorn and these kinds of players are likely once in a generation for any program except the handful of bluebloods. We need multiple post players, but I'll take 2 or 3 Rose Micheaux-type players over a mediocre 6-6 player. I'm really curious to see how good Amani Jenkins and Aniya Trent are next year. I think we'll be better next year as the young talent will have a year of experience and as we integrate the freshman, but this team may really be really good in two years when Carleigh and Carys are the senior leaders. That's the hope on my end.
(In response to this post by CarolinaHokieFan)
As I said in another post, we need better players than Michaeux. And Duffy
knows that. Don't worry, she won't be going after "average" players, no matter what their height is.
(In response to this post by delmarva hokie)
1y
like fast but you still have to have enough bulk to fight for the boards
(In response to this post by delmarva hokie)
Doesn’t work that way with girls
(In response to this post by DGHOKIE)
1y
I feel great with Duffy and her vision...Go Hokies..
(In response to this post by CarolinaHokieFan)
1y
remotely as talented and quick as UCONN. Like you, I hope I'm wrong but $$ and tradition will keep VT from reaching SCe or UCONN's status W/O a big in the middle. It is what it is.
(In response to this post by CarolinaHokieFan)
1y
And when Micheaux was in foul trouble or hurt, and Peterson had to start...Or Baker had to play in the post ...or even Ekh...It showed up against Duke's Fornier. It showed up against FSU. UNC's rebounding hurt us. It showed up against Iowa. Even with NC State's guard, their inside player hurt us.
It isn't as simple as saying we will play fast, switch on screens, and be better because we have guard depth
- We give up offensive rebounds
- We don't get offensive rebounds
- We have a hard time playing defense inside.
- We commit fouls inside
- We would have little depth inside
- If Baker, for example, is consistently playing inside and at risk of fouling, she isn't available on offense
- Switching on screens isn't going to help when Nelson or Wenzel are now defending an opposing post
Whether we won games or not, many teams in the ACC or OCC had bigs that caused damage.
Evenif you say Strong for Uconn is 6'2", she is also a big body. Peterson is 6'0". Baker is 6'2", but she does not have an inside-type body. There is no comparson of Strong and Peterson/Baker. So yes, if we want to move into the top 5-6 of the ACC, we need interior size that is not a project. We may not get a Kitley again for a while, but we finished .500 in the ACC with the chance of finishing better with MIcheaux in the post. If we land at least 1-2 player like or better than MIcheaux, we can be better. Otherwise, a guard-dominated lineup isn't going to move up in the standings.
(In response to this post by CarolinaHokieFan)
We need better defenders than Michaeux. She was good on offense, but not
good defensively, even against players her own size. Against bigger players she just flat could not defend most of them.
(In response to this post by VAHokie89)
1y
would really help us with defensive speed and rebounding
(In response to this post by VAHokie89)
1y
(In response to this post by 133976Hokie)
1y
hard at work on that.
Development and recruiting.
(In response to this post by VAHokie89)
1y
Everyone right now is a "supporting cast"...even Wenzel and Baker. Either or both, or someone else may evolve into "the key player" or the "guy". That comes with consistency and day-in-day out production. We need interior size that is not just a supporting cast member.. Micheaux probably was just a supporting cast member put into a starting/starring role because she was a starter and the main interior player we had who had the potential to get a double-double on any night barring foul trouble.
We need interior size that
(a) can defend and rebound
(b) can avoid foul trouble
(c) plays starter minutes
(d) isn't a project
(e) allows Baker to play more on the perimeter on offense and defense.....
(In response to this post by Stork)
Yes, we need a starting 5 who can hold her own on both ends of the court.
We can't afford projects anywhere in the floor if we want to compete for top 4 in the ACC. And we do want that, at least most of us.
(In response to this post by VAHokie89)
1y
5.1 rpg. Big body.
From Wilkesboro, NC originally. Just down the road.
(In response to this post by VAHokie89)
1y
(In response to this post by VAHokie89)
1y
already top half) To get there we will need an influx of talent. I agree it does not necessarily need to be 6'5ish. With the current roster, I see a two year window. So hopefully we can harvest a couple-three difference makers from the portal this cycle. Hopefully our incoming freshmen are ACC quality (think NC State & Duke), but that might take a season of development. If the answer is poor little VT doesn't have the money, then there needs to be a specific WBB NIL campaign, How much does CMD need to compete at the top of the ACC ? Set a goal and let's go for it !
(In response to this post by CarolinaHokieFan)
1y
You are right, the top 4 next year is a good target. I forgot that the ACC had grown to be so large. I guess it's now the Coast to Coast Conference. I hope the money doesn't become an issue.
The other thing I'd prefer not to see is for us to bring somebody in with big $$$ and move them ahead of the women who have helped rebuild the program. I know that's a bit idealistic, but I truly appreciate the contributions of all of our players this past season.
(In response to this post by 1977hokie)
1y
(In response to this post by CarolinaHokieFan)