We all agree that the Lady Rockets gave us a great season of entertainment. We appreciate their enthusiasm and dedication to the team and wish them well in whatever postseason tournament they play. My question is how great was the 2012-13 season? Have a look below. Opponents ranked by RPI

Dayton (13) L Charlotte (52) W Central Michigan (59) L W b]L Marquette (68) [b]W So they played a total of six games with teams in the TOP 100 RPI and were 3-3.

All remaining games with teams RPI +100 were wins. They were 24-0 against them. And if you look closely you will see that only the first two have RPI below 150. BGSU (105) Akron (108), Santa Clara (155), Arkansas Statte (164), Miami Ohio (178), Ball State (179) X2 SIU Edwardsberg (185), Prairie View (212), Colorado State (216), St Bonnaventure (217), Evansville (222), Milwaukee (228), Buffalo (233), Eastern Michigan (249) X 2, Georgia State (250), Western Michigan (258) X2, Northern Illlinois (280) X2, Nevada (290), Ohio (321), Kent (338)

So I conclude that the Lady Rockets did an excellent job of beating the teams they should have won against. There were no upsets. The signature win was against Charlotte. Otherwise there isn't a lot to brag about given the low level of competition. They played 22 games against teams with losing or even win loss records.
Regarding the team,
1. They had a great starting five, especially regarding their defensive excellence.
2. There was a lack of shooters. Only Inma and Naama could be considered consistent and efficient offensive threats. And Naama had the lowest FG% of her four years at UT.
3. There was no one off the bench who could be relied upon to come in and invigorate the offense on a regular basis. The most consistent of early subs was probably Jones.
4. When things got tough the coach was basically limited to a rotation of eight players. That's a fairly short bench for a 27-3 team.
5. Foul shooting was awful. They ranked 11th in the league. Reinforces the view that the team was lacking good shooters.
6. They really missed Courtney Ingersoll or someone like her who could be a consistent long range threat.

So I conclude that coach and players did about as well, maybe better than we could expect given the team they had and the schedule they played. I think there was a little overhype at the beginning because Naama was returning and there would be five seniors. Their dominance in the MAC league season was outstanding, winning on every other team's court but that was also facilitated by a very weak league this year. Case in point...Ball State was 3-10 in preseason, finished the season with 7 players, had an RPI of 179, lost to Toledo by nearly 30 points on the last regular season game and yet was the second seed in the MAC tourney.

my comment, if you want to nit pick, go follow a different school, i'm proud of these kids and most others are also

Very well written Temox...this is what we all must remember...these are the FACTS that rule the day and not our emotional connection to the great kids we have in our program. You have got to win the games that matter, period. And we did not do that on 2 occasions in particular!
As I said on another post... My two keys are 1) player development...not sure we have that with the program, especially the bigs and 2) mental toughness...not sure if you call it swagger, quite confidence, inner belief, you name it...CMU had it and we did not either time we lost to them. Losing TC would not be ideal but not be the end of the world...she may very well feel that she has done all she can here (COY 3 times OMG) and have to look else where as I am sure she will get the chance. I still feel a little like we make it to the dance...Coach C certainly must have some friends who will reward her and UT for "body of work" over the years...lets at least hope so. Go Rockets!!!

Agree generally with the analysis of the season, but disagree that losing Cullop would be no big deal. She has done an incredible job with the program. The fact that we are disappointed just shows how spoiled we have become due to a superior program. I know that eventually Cullop will get an offer to make more money at a school in a bigger name conference. I hope that there are enough pluses to Toledo that she decides to turn that offer down. I am excited to see what we can do in the postseason (hopefully NCAA), and I am equally excited to see what players step up next year. With Dorth and Zanoguerra coming back, I predict that we will be excellent again. Every year at least one player contributes much more than most fans would have expected (Ingersol last year, Zanoguerra this year). Take heart, ye of little faith. Someone will step up next year in a major way.

It is disturbing that a fan can't make a critique without getting ripped. If they didn't care about the program, they wouldn't post. The board is for a good discussion. BTW, I thing new assistant coach Vicki Hall is going to do a great job recruiting. Personally, I'm not disappointed in the season. I knew there was no bench and we weren't a good outside shooting team. To go 27-3 and win a MAC title is outstanding.

(03-16-2013 11:18 AM)Dwight Wrote:  Agree generally with the analysis of the season, but disagree that losing Cullop would be no big deal. She has done an incredible job with the program. The fact that we are disappointed just shows how spoiled we have become due to a superior program. I know that eventually Cullop will get an offer to make more money at a school in a bigger name conference. I hope that there are enough pluses to Toledo that she decides to turn that offer down. I am excited to see what we can do in the postseason (hopefully NCAA), and I am equally excited to see what players step up next year. With Dorth and Zanoguerra coming back, I predict that we will be excellent again. Every year at least one player contributes much more than most fans would have expected (Ingersol last year, Zanoguerra this year). Take heart, ye of little faith. Someone will step up next year in a major way.

I agree that coach Cullop is excellent. I actually think she did a great job with a team which did not have quite the level of talent we all thought it had. She molded it into an effective program which did a good job of beating the teams which showed up against them. I also think that the players love her which speaks to her as a person.

(03-16-2013 10:40 AM)sylvaniarocketsfan01 Wrote:  my comment, if you want to nit pick, go follow a different school, i'm proud of these kids and most others are also

You kind of miss the point. There is no effort here to degrade the effort and dedication of the players or the way they performed. My point is to fairly evaluate their overall performance against the wider competitive set of teams in order to understand what the NCAA looks at when selecting at large teams. And I tried to give an unbiased assessment of the limitations which prevented them from doing better. If we can't take an honest look at our strengths and weaknesses how do we get better?

(03-16-2013 11:06 AM)rocket 51 Wrote:  Very well written Temox...this is what we all must remember...these are the FACTS that rule the day and not our emotional connection to the great kids we have in our program. You have got to win the games that matter, period. And we did not do that on 2 occasions in particular!
As I said on another post... My two keys are 1) player development...not sure we have that with the program, especially the bigs and 2) mental toughness...not sure if you call it swagger, quite confidence, inner belief, you name it...CMU had it and we did not either time we lost to them. Losing TC would not be ideal but not be the end of the world...she may very well feel that she has done all she can here (COY 3 times OMG) and have to look else where as I am sure she will get the chance. I still feel a little like we make it to the dance...Coach C certainly must have some friends who will reward her and UT for "body of work" over the years...lets at least hope so. Go Rockets!!!

The Lady Rockets did not lose a game to an underdog because they come to every game and gave their best effort. That is a reflection of thier work ethic and the excellent coaching from Cullop. Coach Cullop is an asset to the program. I agree that were she to leave, it would not be long before we would want her back. Like all our fans I feel badly for the players who I am sure are overwhelmingly disappointed. What I was trying to say in my comments above is that they probably got beat by a team with more talent and more size and power. There is no shame in that.

(03-16-2013 11:49 AM)DetroitRocket Wrote:  It is disturbing that a fan can't make a critique without getting ripped. If they didn't care about the program, they wouldn't post. The board is for a good discussion. BTW, I thing new assistant coach Vicki Hall is going to do a great job recruiting. Personally, I'm not disappointed in the season. I knew there was no bench and we weren't a good outside shooting team. To go 27-3 and win a MAC title is outstanding.

I agree. Thanks for your support. I live and die lady rocket basketball like the rest of you.

(03-16-2013 10:40 AM)sylvaniarocketsfan01 Wrote:  my comment, if you want to nit pick, go follow a different school, i'm proud of these kids and most others are also

Wow! I didn't realize that we had established an official "UT Fan Selection and Validation Committee" (self-appointed, no doubt) to weed out the "riff-raff" and determine exactly who can and who can not be a fan.

What ever happened to the old "Disagree without being disagreeable" school of thought??

(03-16-2013 11:49 AM)DetroitRocket Wrote:  It is disturbing that a fan can't make a critique without getting ripped. If they didn't care about the program, they wouldn't post. The board is for a good discussion. BTW, I thing new assistant coach Vicki Hall is going to do a great job recruiting. Personally, I'm not disappointed in the season. I knew there was no bench and we weren't a good outside shooting team. To go 27-3 and win a MAC title is outstanding.

"Ripped" or just opposed?

These public fan/message boards are an odd little item aren't they?

On one hand, we want an honest exchange. On another we want to seem like a supportive fan base both because, well, we're "fans" and because we want this to be the best place for the next recruit to consider. If you can't pay the most, then offer the most. Be the best place to be. What has been very impressive to me is that number of the athletes that have left, have spoken well of the programs under O'Brien.

Are you all that confident that your "concerns" were worded fairly? If so, then my opinion would be don't worry about the "rips." Just respond to the opposed.

Just one piece of data related to the notion that the offense was poor this year or that we had a lack of outside shooting:

This year's team has averaged about the same number of points per game as the WNIT championship team, and shot the same percentage from 3 point range as that team did. That team recall, was filled with outside threats: Naama, Deuce, Linn, Williams... People are remembering last season, which was one of the best 3-point shooting teams in school history, but I don't think the shooting on this year's team was nearly as lacking as many people have made it out to be.

Oh, and we were third in the conference in points per game, only trailing CMU & Akron, both of which were teams built for offense at the expense of defense.

(03-16-2013 01:32 PM)northcoastRocket Wrote:  Just one piece of data related to the notion that the offense was poor this year or that we had a lack of outside shooting:

This year's team has averaged about the same number of points per game as the WNIT championship team, and shot the same percentage from 3 point range as that team did. That team recall, was filled with outside threats: Naama, Deuce, Linn, Williams... People are remembering last season, which was one of the best 3-point shooting teams in school history, but I don't think the shooting on this year's team was nearly as lacking as many people have made it out to be.

Whatr about the awful free throw percentage? We were 11th in the league. Doesn't that reflect shooting accuracy?

(03-16-2013 01:48 PM)northcoastRocket Wrote:  Oh, and we were third in the conference in points per game, only trailing CMU & Akron, both of which were teams built for offense at the expense of defense.

I guess I don't understand how a player can make a reasonable number of 3 point shots, some of which are contested, and not be able to make free throws.

Yes, free throw shooting wasn't good at all, but in reality it only cost us in 1 of the 3 losses. At Dayton we were 12-14 from the line, and the last game we only got 7 shots at the line, so it's hard to say that cost us there either. It was only the first CMU loss that better free throw shooting might have helped. I guess, we might have won some other game by a few more points, but who cares.

The point I was trying to address was the notion several posters have made that the offense was poor and that we had a lack of good shooters (that usually isn't interpreted as free throw shooters, ya know). A review of the season box scores shows that offensively, this team performed pretty much on par with teams from the last few seasons, when I didn't hear as many comments about the poor offense.

I'd rather focus on the fact that this team had the best scoring defense by almost 6 points per game than any UT team in the last 14 years (and maybe more, but that's as far back as my statistics go.) And this team also averaged more rebounds per game than any team over that same 14 year stretch - more than 41 boards per game. How impressive are those statistics?

That's how I choose to remember this team.

(03-16-2013 08:55 AM)temoxley Wrote:  We all agree that the Lady Rockets gave us a great season of entertainment. We appreciate their enthusiasm and dedication to the team and wish them well in whatever postseason tournament they play. My question is how great was the 2012-13 season? Have a look below. Opponents ranked by RPI

Dayton (13) L Charlotte (52) W Central Michigan (59) L W b]L Marquette (68) [b]W So they played a total of six games with teams in the TOP 100 RPI and were 3-3.

All remaining games with teams RPI +100 were wins. They were 24-0 against them. And if you look closely you will see that only the first two have RPI below 150. BGSU (105) Akron (108), Santa Clara (155), Arkansas Statte (164), Miami Ohio (178), Ball State (179) X2 SIU Edwardsberg (185), Prairie View (212), Colorado State (216), St Bonnaventure (217), Evansville (222), Milwaukee (228), Buffalo (233), Eastern Michigan (249) X 2, Georgia State (250), Western Michigan (258) X2, Northern Illlinois (280) X2, Nevada (290), Ohio (321), Kent (338)

So I conclude that the Lady Rockets did an excellent job of beating the teams they should have won against. There were no upsets. The signature win was against Charlotte. Otherwise there isn't a lot to brag about given the low level of competition. They played 22 games against teams with losing or even win loss records.
Regarding the team,
1. They had a great starting five, especially regarding their defensive excellence.
2. There was a lack of shooters. Only Inma and Naama could be considered consistent and efficient offensive threats. And Naama had the lowest FG% of her four years at UT.
3. There was no one off the bench who could be relied upon to come in and invigorate the offense on a regular basis. The most consistent of early subs was probably Jones.
4. When things got tough the coach was basically limited to a rotation of eight players. That's a fairly short bench for a 27-3 team.
5. Foul shooting was awful. They ranked 11th in the league. Reinforces the view that the team was lacking good shooters.
6. They really missed Courtney Ingersoll or someone like her who could be a consistent long range threat.

So I conclude that coach and players did about as well, maybe better than we could expect given the team they had and the schedule they played. I think there was a little overhype at the beginning because Naama was returning and there would be five seniors. Their dominance in the MAC league season was outstanding, winning on every other team's court but that was also facilitated by a very weak league this year. Case in point...Ball State was 3-10 in preseason, finished the season with 7 players, had an RPI of 179, lost to Toledo by nearly 30 points on the last regular season game and yet was the second seed in the MAC tourney.

I agree with pretty much all points.

(03-16-2013 08:07 PM)northcoastRocket Wrote:  Yes, free throw shooting wasn't good at all, but in reality it only cost us in 1 of the 3 losses. At Dayton we were 12-14 from the line, and the last game we only got 7 shots at the line, so it's hard to say that cost us there either. It was only the first CMU loss that better free throw shooting might have helped. I guess, we might have won some other game by a few more points, but who cares.

The point I was trying to address was the notion several posters have made that the offense was poor and that we had a lack of good shooters (that usually isn't interpreted as free throw shooters, ya know). A review of the season box scores shows that offensively, this team performed pretty much on par with teams from the last few seasons, when I didn't hear as many comments about the poor offense.

I'd rather focus on the fact that this team had the best scoring defense by almost 6 points per game than any UT team in the last 14 years (and maybe more, but that's as far back as my statistics go.) And this team also averaged more rebounds per game than any team over that same 14 year stretch - more than 41 boards per game. How impressive are those statistics?

That's how I choose to remember this team.

Those are some very good facts you pointed out. Although this could be described as a some-what disappointing season (because of the suspected final outcome), overall this was a GREAT season.

Agree a great season the Lady Rockets had, and it is not over yet.

(03-16-2013 08:07 PM)northcoastRocket Wrote:  Yes, free throw shooting wasn't good at all, but in reality it only cost us in 1 of the 3 losses. At Dayton we were 12-14 from the line, and the last game we only got 7 shots at the line, so it's hard to say that cost us there either. It was only the first CMU loss that better free throw shooting might have helped. I guess, we might have won some other game by a few more points, but who cares.

The point I was trying to address was the notion several posters have made that the offense was poor and that we had a lack of good shooters (that usually isn't interpreted as free throw shooters, ya know). A review of the season box scores shows that offensively, this team performed pretty much on par with teams from the last few seasons, when I didn't hear as many comments about the poor offense.

I'd rather focus on the fact that this team had the best scoring defense by almost 6 points per game than any UT team in the last 14 years (and maybe more, but that's as far back as my statistics go.) And this team also averaged more rebounds per game than any team over that same 14 year stretch - more than 41 boards per game. How impressive are those statistics?

That's how I choose to remember this team.

I agree completely that the rockets had an excellent defensive team. I think it is the key to their success. All five of the starters were dedicated to and excelled defensively. And Dortch and Smith are at the top of defensive players in the league. And I also agree that rebounding was exceptional, especially given that three of the starters were 5-9 or shorter. Just goes to show that rebounding more about technique and blocking out and not so much about size.

Where I disagree is regarding the offense. I think that the point production on offense being similar to previous years is more a function of the level of competition this year. There were a lot of games where points came easily.

I also believe that shooting was often a problem. Coach even commented on it several times during the year. The poor free throw shooting DID NOT cost them any games because they really did not play many close ones. But I would argue that free throw accuracy DOES reflect shooting skill level. Yolanda, with a range of 2-3 feet had 39 FT %. Lecretia Smith, who also had limited range, had 53 FT%. Naama, who is generally regarded as our best offensive threat had 79 FT%. the techniques taught for free throw shooting are directly coorelated with shooting a jump shot. Square up, balance, proper rhythm and ball rotation. I would guess that it would be difficult to find someone with 75% FT shooting accuracy who does not also have a good FG %.

The good news is that the rockets were able, most of the time, to overcome this limitation with defensive pressure to create stops at the other end of the court and, with 2 point guards in the game, find enough easy looks to score effectively. This is not intended to conclude that they had poor offense but just that they had a shooting weakness which made them vulnerable to a well executed zone defense.