When a coach comes into a program with as little talent as Wisconsin had, it is not reasonable to expect a quick turnaround.  Lisa stone certainly has not been able to effect such a remarkable feat in her two seasons as Badger coach.  But definite progress was made in 2004.  That really is all that can be expected. 

The team won more games overall and in the league.  More importantly, Stone’s first recruiting class made an immediate impact.  Two players in particular gave notice that they will be the building blocks of Stone’s program.  Jolene Anderson, the highest scoring player in Wisconsin girls high school history, quickly showed that she was more than just a scorer and that she could play against anyone.  Anderson set the freshman scoring mark at Wisconsin, was named Big 10 Freshman of the Year and was one of the 12 member junior national USA team that won the world championship.  Her fellow freshman, Janese Banks, did not gain the accolades of Anderson, but her future appears almost as bright.  Banks was injured in a scooter accident right before the start of fall practice.  She missed all the practices before the first game and was hindered all season by that.  Banks is a fluid, athletic player who showed in the Big 10 tournament that she will be a player to be reckoned with in the future.

Freshman Danielle Ward had the usual freshman post four problems, but showed that she will be at least a solid post player in the future.  Akiya Alexander and Shari’ Welton each showed both flashes of Big 10 ability but both also showed that they have weaknesses that make their potential far from certainly reachable. 

The team veterans had mixed seasons.  Seniors Stephanie Rich and Ebba Gebisa were classy young women who always played hard and were excellent leaders.  But Gebisa never came close to being the player her athleticism indicated she could be.  She was never got comfortable with the ball in her hands and was never able to score on anything close to a consistent basis.  One of Jane Albright’s main failings was her inability to recruit point guards.  That cost Albright her job.  It also cost Rich the opportunity to have the career she should have had.  Rich was recruited as a shooting guard.  She was never a great shooter, but she was also never a point guard.  She wasn’t a strong enough ballhandler and she didn’t have the point guard instincts that are developed with time.  That left her too mistake-prone.  By the end of the season, she was on the bench when the game was on the line.

The unquestioned success of the veteran players was power forward Annie Nelson.  In her first two seasons she played less than 100 minutes and little was expected from her.  But she continued to work hard and earned, and the operative word there is earned, a starting job.  Once she had it she showed that she was a legitimate Big 10 player and had a season far better than anyone, except perhaps for Annie, could have hoped for.  She finished as the teams leading rebounder and showed the type of hard-nosed competitiveness that the team badly needs.

As in Stone’s first season, the team got better as the season went on.  At season’s end they were much better than at the beginning, although they were still a ways from being good.  The team scored more than it had in 2003, but that was primarily due to Anderson’s 17.8 points a game.  Way too often the offensive plan called for Jolene to shoot, shoot some more and then shoot again.  On one hand, it was the most effective strategy.  On the other, it was only the most effective because of the overall lack of offensive talent.  Banks showed that she can score, but she has to develop a more reliable jump shot to make her drives as effective as possible.  With Anderson’s shots removed, the team shot only 37.9% from the field and that is at least 4 percentage points below being bad. 

The offensive weakness was compounded by the fact that the defense was not strong, especially in the post.  The Badges were consistently overmatched in the post and several very average post players had excellent nights against Wisconsin.  The overall defense wasn’t a whole lot better.  Wisconsin allowed teams to score 73 points a game on 44.3% shooting.  That is simply bad.

Turnovers had been a problem for years and the team improved to an acceptable 17.5 give-aways a game.  However, they only forced 16.5 a game.  A team that shoots as poorly as the Badgers did needs to find a way to generate offense from its defense.

Overall, the Badgers played decently at home and were able to stay competitive with some of the leagues top teams in the friendly confines of the Kohl Center.  But there was a bigger than acceptable drop-off in play when they left Madison.  In one three game stretch lat in the season, they lost by a total 86 points at Michigan State, Penn State and Minnesota. 

If the axiom slow and steady wins the race is true, the Badgers may be setting themselves up for some wins in the future. 

Return to the Badgers home page