|
Post by floor burnnn on Apr 22, 2010 20:52:24 GMT -5
Oh, yes, definitely 16 - Andrew Au, and 22 - Trung Cao, both seniors. 16 or Andrew Au def. a good player overall, IDK about that 22 (Trung) tho, he seems very inconsistent. they're also both accompanied by a very inconsistent setter, andrew au can adjust to those sets better than he can. both those hitters could possibly do ALOT better than they can now if they were given a better setter is my bet
|
|
|
Post by IHitOut on Apr 22, 2010 20:57:18 GMT -5
16 or Andrew Au def. a good player overall, IDK about that 22 (Trung) tho, he seems very inconsistent. they're also both accompanied by a very inconsistent setter, andrew au can adjust to those sets better than he can. both those hitters could possibly do ALOT better than they can now if they were given a better setter is my bet that seems to me like a VERY bias statement. Even if your right that means 22 is not a player to watch then, since he can't adjust to the set like 16 can.
|
|
|
Post by Isetout on Apr 22, 2010 23:07:07 GMT -5
they're also both accompanied by a very inconsistent setter, andrew au can adjust to those sets better than he can. both those hitters could possibly do ALOT better than they can now if they were given a better setter is my bet that seems to me like a VERY bias statement. Even if your right that means 22 is not a player to watch then, since he can't adjust to the set like 16 can. Actually, it was not a biased statement. I've seen some strong hitters on many teams. but they could not help their teams win 'cause their setters could not find them. When they do find them, the sets were so off that they had to push over or hit out. If these mediocre setters can deliver better sets to thier stronger hitters, we would see a lot more stronger teams.
|
|
|
Post by TT on Apr 22, 2010 23:46:05 GMT -5
A good hitter should be able to adjust to any set. A setter is only important when you are trying to run plays. I'm not saying it wouldn't be nice to have a good setter. But if you were a good hitter you'd be able to get a swing on anything.
|
|
|
Post by IHitOut on Apr 23, 2010 0:32:28 GMT -5
A good hitter should be able to adjust to any set. A setter is only important when you are trying to run plays. I'm not saying it wouldn't be nice to have a good setter. But if you were a good hitter you'd be able to get a swing on anything. thank you
|
|
|
Post by Setters Rule on Apr 23, 2010 5:48:07 GMT -5
A good hitter should be able to adjust to any set. A setter is only important when you are trying to run plays. I'm not saying it wouldn't be nice to have a good setter. But if you were a good hitter you'd be able to get a swing on anything. Setter is probably the most important position on the court. If you dont have a good setter your team will struggle. A good setter makes a bad passer look good. Saying that a setter is only important to run plays is pretty crazy. Good hitters can hit anything, true, but good setters can get to a ball passed 5 feet off the floor and deliver it to a hitter. Setters can isolate blockers to give their hitters a great chance of a kill. Setters can really only run plays with good passes which is rare in high school and why you don't see a lot of quick middle hitters or liberos. Next time you play, have your coach put in the second string setter and see how well your team does, then you will realize how important they are.
|
|
|
Post by somebody on Apr 23, 2010 15:18:05 GMT -5
I know this by first hand experience. A good hitter is able to adjust to (almost) any set, and should be able to get every ball over and in, into a good spot that puts his team in a better position.
However, if a setter is unable to consistently provide a decent set (3-5 ft off the net, carrying out to the antenna but not too far, just enough so that the hitter has most if not all of his options available) I can guarantee that against a good team, scoring will be very difficult. So I agree that a hitter should be able to adjust, but without a good setter I highly doubt that they'll be able to get very many kills.
|
|
|
Post by guest11 on Apr 24, 2010 0:07:21 GMT -5
Coach Zanni,
What are the tie breaker rules for play off seeding?
|
|
|
Post by HonorableMention on Apr 24, 2010 1:38:44 GMT -5
Its actually pretty rare that there is a tie in the seeding because its ranked by matches won vs. matches loss. Its not by overall wins vs overall losses. So for instance you win 11 of your matches 3-0 and your last match you win 3-2. It puts you 36-2. What are the odds another school won all their games in 3 and except for one game?
|
|
|
Post by Scott Zanni on Apr 25, 2010 8:32:20 GMT -5
Playoff seeding is done by overall match record. Ties for overall match record take place multiple times every year and are resolved using the following: 1. If all the teams tied have played each other, the match records of the matches between the teams tied are examined. The team with the best record here is the higher seed. 2. If all teams tied have not played each other, BUT one of the teams has defeated all of the other teams, then that team gets the higher seed (this can only happen with three or more teams tied). 3. If the tie still exists (ie: all teams tied have not played each other) then overall set (game) record is used. That usually breaks most ties. 4. If a tie still exists, we throw our hands up in the air and toss a coin.
It gets a little messy and there are few more minor situations that can happen, but that is the gist of it.
|
|
|
Post by guest11 on Apr 25, 2010 11:03:02 GMT -5
Playoff seeding is done by overall match record. Ties for overall match record take place multiple times every year and are resolved using the following: 1. If all the teams tied have played each other, the match records of the matches between the teams tied are examined. The team with the best record here is the higher seed. 2. If all teams tied have not played each other, BUT one of the teams has defeated all of the other teams, then that team gets the higher seed (this can only happen with three or more teams tied). 3. If the tie still exists (ie: all teams tied have not played each other) then overall set (game) record is used. That usually breaks most ties. 4. If a tie still exists, we throw our hands up in the air and toss a coin. It gets a little messy and there are few more minor situations that can happen, but that is the gist of it. Thanks for the explanation. If three teams tie for the overall match record and A beated B and B beated C, but C never played A, would this resolve in A being the highest seed,followed by B and then C?
|
|
|
Post by Scott Zanni on Apr 25, 2010 13:17:54 GMT -5
Thanks for the explanation. If three teams tie for the overall match record and A beated B and B beated C, but C never played A, would this resolve in A being the highest seed,followed by B and then C? [/quote]
No, in this case all three teams did not play each other, nor did either team defeat the other two. In this case it would revert to (set) game record.
|
|
|
Post by IPancakeallnight on Apr 25, 2010 21:48:50 GMT -5
Wow! Can't believe season is almost over.
Ps. If Czmplayer is reading this you just wasted 5 sec of your life.
|
|
|
Post by czmplayer on Apr 25, 2010 22:02:46 GMT -5
that seems to me like a VERY bias statement. Even if your right that means 22 is not a player to watch then, since he can't adjust to the set like 16 can. Actually, it was not a biased statement. I've seen some strong hitters on many teams. but they could not help their teams win 'cause their setters could not find them. When they do find them, the sets were so off that they had to push over or hit out. If these mediocre setters can deliver better sets to thier stronger hitters, we would see a lot more stronger teams. Since this applies to us i just decided to quote this, but as #22 (Trung Cao) is relatively new to the sport (first year actually playing team) and the middle he is paired with is inexperienced there are many times the set will fall right in between the two and our team's lack of communication will cause discrepencies in the hit. Speaking for myself (3rd year playing) I have many problems adjusting to the set, added with my inability to aim, just makes the set look even worse. Therefore it is agreed its not all the setter's fault (for any team) but the team as a whole, we can't just depend on him now can we. Hitters have to be just as depenable too. That last post was pretty amusing ahahahaha
|
|