Mitty beat Pinewood 72-51
- Thread starter Streak One
- Start date
From the scoring summary, it looks like Hunter Hernandez had another big game in the playoffs. Great contribution from Mitty's super sophomore.
Three keys to the game.
1. Pinewood's very slow start. They were getting good looks early, but missed three or four layups and their first six three-pointers. Mitty was much more poised out the gate, went up by 10 or so, and it never really got closer than that.
2. Mitty on the glass. The Pinewood coach had a clever defensive scheme for Jones -- he had a guard making her work to bring up the ball and challenging her on the perimeter, and then had a "big" switch onto her once she came inside the arc. It worked. Jones was very quiet in the first half. But the switching left Pinewood scrambling whenever a shot went up. More than half of Mitty's points in the first came from offensive rebounds. Hernandez was everywhere.
3. Zebras. For Pinewood to win, it needed a lot to break in its favor. The whistles didn't. Jones should have been called for a charge in the first half that would have given her three fouls. Astrom picked up two of the phantom variety. And Mitty's strong rebounding was made stronger by a few uncalled over-the-backs.
To be clear, Mitty outplayed Pinewood from beginning to end. But they didn't outclass Pinewood. A rematch could be rather different.
1. Pinewood's very slow start. They were getting good looks early, but missed three or four layups and their first six three-pointers. Mitty was much more poised out the gate, went up by 10 or so, and it never really got closer than that.
2. Mitty on the glass. The Pinewood coach had a clever defensive scheme for Jones -- he had a guard making her work to bring up the ball and challenging her on the perimeter, and then had a "big" switch onto her once she came inside the arc. It worked. Jones was very quiet in the first half. But the switching left Pinewood scrambling whenever a shot went up. More than half of Mitty's points in the first came from offensive rebounds. Hernandez was everywhere.
3. Zebras. For Pinewood to win, it needed a lot to break in its favor. The whistles didn't. Jones should have been called for a charge in the first half that would have given her three fouls. Astrom picked up two of the phantom variety. And Mitty's strong rebounding was made stronger by a few uncalled over-the-backs.
To be clear, Mitty outplayed Pinewood from beginning to end. But they didn't outclass Pinewood. A rematch could be rather different.
Sounds like the exact opposite of last year's NorCal final, when the referees didn't call several obvious fouls on Astrom, but whistled Haley Jones for several of the phantom variety. So yeah, referees can have an effect if you aren't clearly better than the opponent. Seems like Mitty is clearly better this year, and any rematch would be in Mitty's gym.
Didn't I say the keys to the game were the referees, rebounding and depth?
All three went in Mitty's favor and result was a dominant win for Mitty.
Great defensive game plan also by Mitty. Make Decker and Thompson beat you....back off them all the way in the paint. No help off Astrom or Jump and use length to defend. Mitty has a lot of length. Olivia Williams soph. transfer from Pinewood to Mitty had 8 big points too.
Hard to say Mitty is better this year. They had Ortiz and Blakes last year, although Blakes was injured end of season. Jones is what makes this team go. Last year they could fall back on Ortiz. Nothing to fall back on this year.
I will say though, that Pinewood is not as good as last year because of losing Claros. Jovanovic may have helped them a bit, bit injuries are all part of the game.
I meant Mitty is clearly better than Pinewood this year.
Losing Claros is huge. She was a rock at the point last year. Players like her are really tough to find and can hold a team together.
Clearly, If you look at the last 4 years of the Pinewood vs Mitty matchup from a roster perspective. Mitty had a total of 9 D1 players and Pinewood had 2. The lenght, ball movement, rebounding, athleticism and versatility was always favoring Mitty.
They seem to reload year after year.
True ! That is why I for one am always amazed that teams like Pinewood, MM, CW, ESCP, SJND, and a few others often with little to no size and/ or so call D1 players can continue to season after season upset many teams they have no business being within 30 points of. And it is why I always say "everything matters, but coaching really matters."
Last edited:
Coaching definitely matters! But let's keep it real. I know at least one of the school's you mentioned offer "financial aid" to their players so that they can get a free education.
Talent helps as well.
It's called good recruiting whether indirect or direct.... Everyone knows it happens at the schools that are successful year after year. Some more than others and Yes some programs do speak for themselves and kids come, but there is always some undue influence involved at some level at some point. Every top wbal school costs 40k or more.....menlo, shp, pinewood, priory and all of them are always searching for the talent that will make them competitive for the next 4 years. Pinewood rarely has d1 talent but had 2 for the past 4 years and a pg that just had a great frosh year at ucsd. Talent wins games.
Winning Is Fun, and stepslide,
Sure it will always take talent to have better achievement. But regardless to how a program attracts and/ or recruits talent some coaches get more out of their players and their teams than others do. All the recruiting in the world can't make a 5'2 girls play like she's 6 foot. Or make a team with no player over 5'10 be able to still beat teams with multiple 6 foot players. Or encourage a player to drive to the hoop or use a step back to become harder to defend. Or to step back a bit further behind the 3 point line to find a better ability to set your feet to get off a better shot. Or be able to year in and out keep a program a float and prospering when they have key injuries and just down seasons with talent compared to other seasons when they may have had more size and/ or talent and experience.
"Everything matters, but coaching really matters." They decide who makes the team. Who will be in the starting lineup. Who will be in the 8 player rotation or if the rotation will run deeper. What defense will be used. What game plan and preparations will be used going into a game. What adjustments if any will be used during a game. When and when not to work the referees. When to go big or go small. When to push tempo or slow things down. What short and long term goals a team or individual will or should have etc.....
Many coaches and/ or programs are also the reason talented players want to attend or be so call recruited to a particular school. Some parents and children prefer or don't prefer certain coaching styles or programs. It's nothing wrong with trying to find the best fit. Some want the mix of what a school offers academically, socially, and athletics. Some put more focus on one or the other.
Last edited:
You may want to remove MM and SJND from the coaching equation, both use a certain local AAU club to pry top talent. Both are loaded rosters with future college players. Obviously both can coach. However, if you look at a MM they have a roster spanning multiple cities, districts, even counties. I will give you Pinewood and ESCP, despite being privates which has its own unique advantages. Those 2 probably have the best two coaches in the business.
Last edited:
We can't knock the fact that both programs in question have a successful feeder outfit. That feeder outfit had to become a feeder some way or another. And I personally think coaching, philosophy, and vision, played a major part in it. And you still haven't accounted for why those teams can compete without having multiple 6 footers each season and/ or lots of experienced and/ or so call D1 players. Some coaches to include all I have mentioned often get more out of their players than other programs do. And they are often able to do more with less. And those are a few facts on why they continue to attract and pull players and families in from further radius than many others are able to do.
Last edited:
I can agree with that. My point is when you peel the onion back both MM and SJND actually have more talent than other teams being considered open. Both coaches are fine, but let's be honest they are loaded rosters with AAU rich talent and future college players.
Yes coaching does matter, not disagreeing with that. The true test would be for the coaches you have in mind to go to a normal public school and win championships. Build a program not based on the talent you get but the talent you develop. Go to a public school and beat the private schools... Win games you aren't supposed to win.
Perhaps? I have never really taken that close a look. Probably because I haven't really seen many girl players from the grade school to the professional level that I have personally been all that impressed with. When I look at even the so call best teams I see poor fundamentals displayed on both sides of the ball and often times selfish or poor decision making. So the coaches that are able to get more children and more parents to buy into what they are doing for whatever reason I have to give them credit. Unless of course they are breaking the law to attract talent and or win games. Paying off refs and or others in positions of influence isn't acceptable. But being able to prosper and help others do the same will never be something I hate or look down upon. Much continued success to those who have found the right philosophies and coaching styles to continue to thrive year in and out.
All I can say is far more need to take a closer look at what some of the elite programs are doing so that they too can improve their programs. A lot of it has to do with fear or lack there of. Some out there will get what I'm saying about fear while it will fly miles over most others head. There isn't that much separation from being competitive or not. You can't be your own competition by constantly getting in your own way as most continue to do.
That is my point with coaches like Phil Jackson ( who in my opinion is over rated) and Steve Kerr. But the fact is all of these coaches are doing something right. And neither will most likely be willing to go back to coaching 3rd graders or anything less than the championship leveled players they have grown accustomed to coaching any time soon. I wish they would too.
That said, I've seen all of these coaches win games they had no reason other than good coaching decisions and good leadership winning.
I'm not that easily impressed. Kind of reminds me of when I think it was perhaps Richard Pryor ( I could be wrong) who said to Stevie Wonder "that's great, but if you really want to impress me, here grab the wheel."
Last edited:
Call it the John Calipari way. Outstanding recruiters. Having the top AAU progam in Northern CA means you can really throw your weight around. We'll leave it at that. Heritage and SRV do it with local kids they develop.
