Men's Volleyball 2018

[Donuthole]

Nice finish to set 2.

[Topper]

Good second set.

[Topper]

Lousy beginning to the third set.

[Topper]

Third set leveled. Serves for both teams are less than stellar.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Boo. Had lots of chances there.

[Topper]

What a lousy way to give away the third set. Momentum UCLA's.

[Donuthole]

Men's Volleyball 2018

BYU led 22-19 and somehow blew the set.

[pelagius]

Of course losing to UCLA was disappointing but I think it was a pretty good season overall. Not sure they overperformed but they certainly didn't underperform. Some thoughts:

1. I think the biggest difference between this team and the 16 and 17 iterations is the lack of a pin hitter that can terminate well out of system. In 2016, Patch was the best in the college game at this. Sander is an elite pin hitter, but much more limited out of system than Patch and Langlois. Given the Lack of elite talent at setter and libero (and I like both Durkin and Hendrickson ... but Durkin, for example, is not as talented as Micah Ma'a (UCLA's setter)), BYU really needs a guy who can go over the top out of system with effectiveness. Without this kind of pin hitter it puts a lot of pressure to serve really well against teams like UCLA. BYU didn't quite have enough serving pressure last night.

2. BYU loses both assistants. Who does Olmstead bring in? Does this turnover lead to a drop-off?

3. BYU is incredibly thin at setter going forward. Only Will Stanley? Does Cyrus Fa'alago get a shot at setter next year (I guess Lincoln is possibility too)? Also, as near as I can tell BYU doesn't have setter recruit coming in for next year.

4. Can Fernandez develop into an elite opposite? He is an elite server and blocks well. I also think he digs well for an oppo, but he only hit 0.269 for season. Yes, he got a lot of trash sets, but I don't think he got more trash sets than Sander (0.321 hitter). Can he develop into a effective out of system terminator?

5. BYU has some highly rated pin hitter recruits coming in and some that redshirted this year. Will Storm and Cyrus be the OH next year or will at least one younger guy break through? Maybe Davide Gardini (6-9 OH from Italy ... his Dad is a legendary player) or Miguel Sarabia?

[Topper]

Of course losing to UCLA was disappointing but I think it was a pretty good season overall. Not sure they overperformed but they certainly didn't underperform. Some thoughts:

1. I think the biggest difference between this team and the 16 and 17 iterations is the lack of a pin hitter that can terminate well out of system. In 2016, Patch was the best in the college game at this. Sander is an elite pin hitter, but much more limited out of system than Patch and Langlois. Given the Lack of elite talent at setter and libero (and I like both Durkin and Hendrickson ... but Durkin, for example, is not as talented as Micah Ma'a (UCLA's setter)), BYU really needs a guy who can go over the top out of system with effectiveness. Without this kind of pin hitter it puts a lot of pressure to serve really well against teams like UCLA. BYU didn't quite have enough serving pressure last night.

2. BYU loses both assistants. Who does Olmstead bring in? Does this turnover lead to a drop-off?

3. BYU is incredibly thin at setter going forward. Only Will Stanley? Does Cyrus Fa'alago get a shot at setter next year (I guess Lincoln is possibility too)? Also, as near as I can tell BYU doesn't have setter recruit coming in for next year.

4. Can Fernandez develop into an elite opposite? He is an elite server and blocks well. I also think he digs well for an oppo, but he only hit 0.269 for season. Yes, he got a lot of trash sets, but I don't think he got more trash sets than Sander (0.321 hitter). Can he develop into a effective out of system terminator?

5. BYU has some highly rated pin hitter recruits coming in and some that redshirted this year. Will Storm and Cyrus be the OH next year or will at least one younger guy break through? Maybe Davide Gardini (6-9 OH from Italy ... his Dad is a legendary player) or Miguel Sarabia?

Who will help up the middle? There were times against UCLA, where the lack of height really hurt BYU?

What can BYU to improve its service, which really let BYU down in that third set?

The lack of a setter is disconcerting as well. I continue to hope this next season will see BYU return to glory and the promised land of a natty, but they are falling short.

[pelagius]

Who will help up the middle? There were times against UCLA, where the lack of height really hurt BYU?

I don't think I agree. BYU is very good up the middle, and very tall. UCLA and BYU have basically the same sized middles. Nobody can stop Gyimah as a middle attacker (UCLA's best middle). He touches like 12' 5''. Gyimah is simply going to go over the top against good blockers if UCLA is in system. You have to serve well enough to limit his touches. Gyimah is simply the best offensive middle in college. That doesn't mean BYU's middles aren't very good. They are.

Miki and Ferrerier are the likely starting middles next season. Both are very good middles. I do think both can improve offensively. Ferrerier needs to imrpove is float too.

What can BYU to improve its service, which really let BYU down in that third set?

I don't think it's an particular area of concern. BYU is a very good serving team, but serving has a lot of volatility. I would match rather see a BYU lineup that structurally doesn't need to be as good from the service line to be elite. So I think improved passing and out of system terminating are far more important areas of improvement than serving.

[Topper]

I don't think I agree. BYU is very good up the middle, and very tall. UCLA and BYU have basically the same sized middles. Nobody can stop Gyimah as a middle attacker (UCLA's best middle). He touches like 12' 5''. Gyimah is simply going to go over the top against good blockers if UCLA is in system. You have to serve well enough to limit his touches.

Miki and Ferrerier are the likely starting middles next season. Both are very good middles. I do think both can improve offensively. Ferrerier needs to imrpove is float too.



I don't think it's an particular area of concern. BYU is a very good serving team, but serving has a lot of volatility. I would match rather see a BYU lineup that structurally doesn't need to be as good from the service line to be elite. So I think improved passing and out of system terminating are far more important areas of improvement than serving.

Gyimah is awesome and got too many touches.

And how will BYU improve its passing with its setter limitations. Many of those sets were very mediocre last night.

[pelagius]

Gyimah is awesome and got too many touches.

And how will BYU improve its passing with its setter limitations. Many of those sets were very mediocre last night.

By passing, I mean the first contact. If BYU improves its passing, then the setter will get the pass in better position and the sets will almost certainly be better. I think BYU will be a better passing team next year. Hendrickson (the libero) is a freshman. He improved a lot during the year. He needs to make an incremental leap next year. I think the upper bound from him is near elite play. OH like Cyrus and Storm need to pass better. Cyrus has good hands. He should pass better than he is I think. I expect he will given he wasn't able to play this year until mid-season.

[Topper]

By passing, I mean the first contact. If BYU improves its passing, then the setter will get the pass in better position and the sets will almost certainly be better. I think BYU will be a better passing team next year. Hendrickson (the libero) is a freshman. He improved a lot during the year. He needs to make an incremental leap next year. I think the upper bound from him is near elite play. OH like Cyrus and Storm need to pass better. Cyrus has good hands. He should pass better than he is I think. I expect he will given he wasn't able to play this year until mid-season.

Thanks for the clarification. Cyrus going down sucked too.

[pelagius]

Thanks for the clarification. Cyrus going down sucked too.

Let me add, a few more thoughts. This was an elite team. And they developed well over the season; I think this was the Olmstead crew's best coaching job. So I guess I take back what I said earlier. I think they probably overachieved a little (and underachieved a little in 2016). To have a third final four appearance in row after losing Patch and Langlois is pretty great. Patch started for the U.S. in World League last summer, and Langlois was a bench player. I think, in general, people are too quick to criticize serving (knock it off SFH crowd). College men's teams these days all serve really aggressively. UCLA, BYU, and Ohio State all have a mind boggling number of errors over the course of a season. These coaches have all come to the same conclusion: that even though serving creates lots of errors, your opponents side-out rate will on average be lower with aggressive serving than not. They may be wrong about the optimality of this approach, but I think there is a reason why basically all the best teams have super-aggressive serving philosophies.

Here is where I think the team was a little disappointing. Structurally this should have a been a better passing team. Your three main passers are the Libero and your two OHs in men's volleyball (this isn't true for women's volleyball because of the more permissive subbing rules). If you go with athletic and smaller OHs, they need be relatively good passers. This was a smallish OH lineup for BYU: Sander at 6' 4" and Fa'alago at 6' 4'' or Sander 6' 4" and Storm at 6' 1". And all three are quite athletic. Teams structured this way need to be good passing teams, because they are going to be relatively disadvantage in other dimensions (for example, typically they aren't going to be great out of system terminators). A team structured this way has to be better at passing than a team that has a 6' 10" Jake Langlois as an OH. I don't think the passing dimension of the team quite got to the level it needed to. I'm not suggesting the team didn't work hard enough or the players aren't talented enough or the coaching is not good enough. It's a crazy competitive environment for the top 10 or so teams in men's volleyball. Sometimes, thinks don't quite gel in time. Also even if this dimension came together perfectly, BYU may have still lost last night. If BYU had this dimension reach its maximum potential, maybe BYU odds would have been 65/35 instead 50/50 to beat UCLA last night.

[Topper]

Let me add, a few more thoughts. This was an elite team. And they developed well over the season; I think this was the Olmstead crew's best coaching job. So I guess I take back what I said earlier. I think they probably overachieved a little (and underachieved a little in 2016). To have a third final four appearance in row after losing Patch and Langlois is pretty great. Patch started for the U.S. in World League last summer, and Langlois was a bench player. I think, in general, people are too quick to criticize serving (knock it off SFH crowd). College men's teams these days all serve really aggressively. UCLA, BYU, and Ohio State all have a mind boggling number of errors over the course of a season. These coaches have all come to the same conclusion: that even though serving creates lots of errors, your opponents side-out rate will on average be lower with aggressive serving than not. They may be wrong about the optimality of this approach, but I think there is a reason why basically all the best teams have super-aggressive serving philosophies.

Here is where I think the team was a little disappointing. Structurally this should have a been a better passing team. Your three main passers are the Libero and your two OHs in men's volleyball (this isn't true for women's volleyball because of the more permissive subbing rules). If you go with athletic and smaller OHs, they need be relatively good passers. This was a smallish OH lineup for BYU: Sander at 6' 4" and Fa'alago at 6' 4'' or Sander 6' 4" and Storm at 6' 1". And all three are quite athletic. Teams structured this way need to be good passing teams, because they are going to be relatively disadvantage in other dimensions (for example, typically they aren't going to be great out of system terminators). A team structured this way has to be better at passing than a team that has a 6' 10" Jake Langlois as an OH. I don't think the passing dimension of the team quite got to the level it needed to. I'm not suggesting the team didn't work hard enough or the players aren't talented enough or the coaching is not good enough. It's a crazy competitive environment for the top 10 or so teams in men's volleyball. Sometimes, thinks don't quite gel in time. Also even if this dimension came together perfectly, BYU may have still lost last night. If BYU had this dimension reach its maximum potential, maybe BYU odds would have been 65/35 instead 50/50 to beat UCLA last night.

Good thoughts. I've seen you use the term "out of system" termination. What exactly does that mean?