| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11232
Back to top |
 Posted: 03/31/16 12:45 pm ::: |
Reply  |
|
A mock draft is a little too much work when there are so many uncertainties. Thoughts ...
Stewart: Obvious No. 1
Jefferson: Size is the concern, and how she will fare when not surrounded by elite talent. It's possible she will struggle some when her running mates are not markedly better than the opposition. It's possible none of that will matter.
Tuck: I see Draymond Green -- with bad knees. And Draymond was no sure thing, and neither is Tuck. She might not be able to overcome her size and quickness limitations with skill and intelligence. But then again, she might.
Mitchell: What does she do well? She does everything OK, but generally a player who steps up at the next level has one skill that stands out. Not always, of course, but middling three-point shooting and uncertain ballhandling make me suspicious. She could be the next Shavonte Zellous, though, and that would be fine.
Banham: Will her scoring be erased when she's guarded by taller, faster, quicker, stronger athletes? Or will she still find a way? I don't think anyone knows the answer to that ...
Boyette: Is consistency in her future, and have her demons really been put to rest? High, high ceiling if it all comes together, and note that her high school coach is now an assistant at Connecticut.
Powers: Wings who can't shoot threes are seldom stars in the WNBA, or even starters for good teams. I have serious doubts here.
South Florida Williams: Looks to be a solid contributor. Can shoot, has athleticism. Don't see her as a star, but maybe the safest pick after Stewart and Jefferson.
Jonquel Jones: Roll them dice ...
Ruth Hamblin: Jayne Appel is more athletic and more skilled. 'Nuf sed.
Kahleah Copper: Despite the CViv coaching, a possibility. Size matters.
Lexi Rydalch: I like the mean streak ... could surprise.
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
UK1996
Joined: 03 Sep 2015
Posts: 403
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/31/16 1:19 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| I really like the Draymond Green comparison with Tuck. Tuck is a player who does a bit of everything. Connecticut's front court is going to have a lot of young talent this season.
_________________
Kentucky Wildcats, Sky, & Spurs
|
|
Randy
Joined: 08 Oct 2011
Posts: 10911
Back to top |
|
TotalCardinalMove
Joined: 13 Oct 2013
Posts: 1467
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/31/16 3:53 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Someone who doesn't get talked about much, but I do like her as a player is Lexi Petersen out of Oregon. I saw her name on the draft roster on the Lynx's draft central, and was pleasantly surprised to see her there. She has pretty good shooting ability, and was a big reason for Oregon's NIT run. She's definitely not a first round pick, but I think she is worth the look in later rounds. One thing I can knock her on though is turnovers. She seems to have a lot a game.
|
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63979
Back to top |
|
MNfan22
Joined: 20 Nov 2004
Posts: 2750
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/01/16 12:21 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| pilight wrote: |
| UofDel_Alum wrote: |
This is only my fourth draft that I have gone thru. It seems to me that the first round is the deepest in talent that I have seen. I am excited to see the top six pics are really going to help teams that need the talent and as a result is going to make the WNBA just better and interesting to watch.
Am I mistaken about this years draft. Would like to hear other views. |
This is a good, deep draft. |
Interesting. For those who think this draft is deep, define your meaning of "deep" ? Deep as in impact players? Or, deep as in potential to make rosters?
Personally, I don't find this draft to be all that deep. I find it to be top heavy of 1 and then filled with a lot of question marks and not deep with immediate impact players. IMO, most will take some time to show what they really have to bring to the pro table. And how quickly they will have an impact will be very dependent on where a players gets drafted. (which could be said of every draft I guess). Guess I'm just not feeling depth in '16.
Cap issues may bump some fringe vets to make space for cheaper rookies but guess I'll be content to be surprised by how successful this class will be as I'm not expecting much. Will be interesting to see what coaches do with them.
Personally I see more depth down the road that has my eye. I'm more excited about the talent and potential impact coming along in the next 2 drafts with the '17 class and top heavy impact in the '18 class.
_________________
Minnesota Lynx-est 1999-WNBA Champs! '11,'13,'15, '17
|
|
Jet Jaguar
Joined: 11 Feb 2014
Posts: 1111
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/01/16 12:49 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| MNfan22 wrote: |
| pilight wrote: |
| UofDel_Alum wrote: |
This is only my fourth draft that I have gone thru. It seems to me that the first round is the deepest in talent that I have seen. I am excited to see the top six pics are really going to help teams that need the talent and as a result is going to make the WNBA just better and interesting to watch.
Am I mistaken about this years draft. Would like to hear other views. |
This is a good, deep draft. |
Interesting. For those who think this draft is deep, define your meaning of "deep" ? Deep as in impact players? Or, deep as in potential to make rosters?
Personally, I don't find this draft to be all that deep. I find it to be top heavy of 1 and then filled with a lot of question marks and not deep with immediate impact players. IMO, most will take some time to show what they really have to bring to the pro table. And how quickly they will have an impact will be very dependent on where a players gets drafted. (which could be said of every draft I guess). Guess I'm just not feeling depth in '16.
Cap issues may bump some fringe vets to make space for cheaper rookies but guess I'll be content to be surprised by how successful this class will be as I'm not expecting much. Will be interesting to see what coaches do with them.
Personally I see more depth down the road that has my eye. I'm more excited about the talent and potential impact coming along in the next 2 drafts with the '17 class and top heavy impact in the '18 class. |
Completely agree. It's not that deep. I don't know what people are looking at.
_________________
Oderint dum metuant - Let them hate, so long as they fear
|
|
blaase22
Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Posts: 4164
Location: Paradise
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/01/16 1:04 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Besides 2001 and 1999 what wnba drafts have been deep
?lol
Maybe people mean deep in comparison to the last few drafts.
|
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63979
Back to top |
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63979
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/01/16 1:18 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| blaase22 wrote: |
Besides 2001 and 1999 what wnba drafts have been deep
?lol
Maybe people mean deep in comparison to the last few drafts. |
2005 was thought as an ugly draft (McCarville #1 pick), but many of those players hung on for long careers.
2014 seemed kinda nice.
_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
|
|
PUmatty
Joined: 10 Nov 2004
Posts: 16393
Location: Chicago
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/01/16 10:34 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Shades wrote: |
| blaase22 wrote: |
Besides 2001 and 1999 what wnba drafts have been deep
?lol
Maybe people mean deep in comparison to the last few drafts. |
2005 was thought as an ugly draft (McCarville #1 pick), but many of those players hung on for long careers.
2014 seemed kinda nice. |
2004 was a nice, deep draft, with seven eventual All-Stars and several others who had nice careers.
|
|
PRballer
Joined: 18 Apr 2007
Posts: 2563
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/01/16 12:40 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| blaase22 wrote: |
Besides 2001 and 1999 what wnba drafts have been deep
?lol
Maybe people mean deep in comparison to the last few drafts. |
2004 was also a very strong draft. Several first round players had long, productive careers.
|
|
LosLynxAngeles
Joined: 26 Jul 2014
Posts: 860
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/01/16 1:34 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| PRballer wrote: |
| blaase22 wrote: |
Besides 2001 and 1999 what wnba drafts have been deep
?lol
Maybe people mean deep in comparison to the last few drafts. |
2004 was also a very strong draft. Several first round players had long, productive careers. |
i think 2013 has the possibility of being just as good as 2004.
out of 2004 you got Taurasi, and Whalen as the "stars"
then Beard, and Brunson had long successful careers.
Powell, Perkins, Christon, Hoffman, and Robinson had productive careers. but then other than that not a whole lot.
2013 has Delle Donne and Griner who unless something really bad happens, they are on their way to star careers.
Diggins, Messessmen, Bentley, and Bone have done well and definitely have the potential to be great.
Hill, Rogers, Hawkins, Goodrich, Greene, Faris are all at least still in the league after 3 years and have some potential if given the right opportunity.
|
|
TotalCardinalMove
Joined: 13 Oct 2013
Posts: 1467
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/01/16 5:17 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Interesting series of videos where Dan Hughes talks about the draft, and the kind of player he's looking for. Also interesting how he said they've been scouting the same small core of players from the beginning of the season to now. http://ow.ly/10bwEn
|
|
J-Spoon
Joined: 31 Jan 2009
Posts: 6831
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/02/16 2:21 am ::: |
Reply |
|
OK my penultimate mock, this time no Powers, yes Tuck
1. Sea Stewart
2. SA Jefferson
3. Conn Tuck
4. Conn Banham
5. Dallas C. Williams USF
6. LA Mitchell
7. Was Jones
8. PX Boyette
9. Ind Copper
10. Chi Hamblin
11. Atl Bulgak
12. NY Holmes
13. Atl N. Johnson
14. Minn Weisner
15. Conn Alston
16. Atl Alleyne
17. LA Graves
18. Dallas C. Williams A&M
19. Was Galdiera
20. PX C. Walker
21. Ind Cable
22. Minn Fagbenle
23. Conn Butler
24. NY S. Richards
|
|
zune69
Joined: 27 May 2010
Posts: 8193
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/02/16 6:29 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| blaase22 wrote: |
Besides 2001 and 1999 what wnba drafts have been deep
?lol
Maybe people mean deep in comparison to the last few drafts. |
The 2009 draft class had some solid depth.
1 Atlanta Dream - Angel McCoughtry.3 finals app
2 Washington Mystics - Marissa Coleman.1 final app
3 Chicago Sky - Kristi Toliver.
4 Minnesota Lynx - Renee Montgomery.1 final app
5 Phoenix Mercury - DeWanna Bonner,2 finals app
6 Indiana Fever - Briann January.2 finals app
7 Sacramento Monarchs - Courtney Paris.1 wnba finals app
8 New York Liberty - Kia Vaughn
9 Minnesota Lynx - Quanitra Hollingsworth
10 Connecticut Sun - Chante Black
11 Detroit Shock - Shavonte Zellous.finals app
10 finals appearances & 4 championship from the 2009 1st rd class.
Last edited by zune69 on 04/02/16 1:47 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63979
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/02/16 6:55 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Spooner, since pilight has showed a strong interest in Weisner, and I have shown a strong interest in bringing in a halfway decent post player, could you swap #11 and #14?
My ultimate Lynx draft under your scenario.
14. Bulgak
22. Knight
35. Hollivay
_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
Last edited by Shades on 04/02/16 10:46 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
eyevolley4
Joined: 27 Apr 2006
Posts: 4640
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/02/16 9:03 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| If I am San Antonio, and I can choose from Jefferson or Tuck, I would go with Tuck. This is a team in rebuild mode so taking Jefferson is very short sighted with Danielle Robinson back next year. For a year, Jia Perkins can certainly be a starter alongside Kayla McBride. Tuck gives them a presence on the wing they have needed for years and never had, or always chose against because of their guard heavy play.
_________________
Some days are meant to be remembered.
|
|
root_thing
Joined: 28 Apr 2007
Posts: 7365
Location: Underground
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/02/16 9:18 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| I'm bored with the 2016 draft. (yawns) I've moved on to 2017. Anyone need a PG? This is the draft for you!
|
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63979
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/02/16 2:28 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| TotalCardinalMove wrote: |
| Interesting series of videos where Dan Hughes talks about the draft, and the kind of player he's looking for. Also interesting how he said they've been scouting the same small core of players from the beginning of the season to now. http://ow.ly/10bwEn |
This is your team. Did you get much out of those videos?
_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
|
|
TotalCardinalMove
Joined: 13 Oct 2013
Posts: 1467
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/02/16 2:34 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Shades wrote: |
| TotalCardinalMove wrote: |
| Interesting series of videos where Dan Hughes talks about the draft, and the kind of player he's looking for. Also interesting how he said they've been scouting the same small core of players from the beginning of the season to now. http://ow.ly/10bwEn |
This is your team. Did you get much out of those videos? |
I'm thinking that the player selected won't be a big surprise. I think the "pool" he's referring to is probably Jefferson, Tuck, maybe Banham and Powers is she leaves. The Stars draft profile included those four, and Boyette and Mitchell. I don't think Mitchell or Boyette should get taken anywhere close to #2, but I'm sure he watched them a little during the season. I wouldn't expect anything crazy though.
|
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63979
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/02/16 4:00 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
UConns Breanna Stewart wins 2016 Wade Trophy
http://wbca.org/about/press-releases/uconn%E2%80%99s-breanna-stewart-wins-2016-wade-trophy
| Quote: |
| For the second-consecutive season, Breanna Stewart of the University of Connecticut is the winner of the 2016 Wade Trophy, the Women's Basketball Coaches Association (WBCA) announced today. The prestigious award, regarded as "The Heisman of Women's Basketball," is presented annually to the NCAA Division I Player of the Year by the WBCA. |
_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
|
|
myrtle
Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32341
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/03/16 9:24 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| eyevolley4 wrote: |
| If I am San Antonio, and I can choose from Jefferson or Tuck, I would go with Tuck. This is a team in rebuild mode so taking Jefferson is very short sighted with Danielle Robinson back next year. For a year, Jia Perkins can certainly be a starter alongside Kayla McBride. Tuck gives them a presence on the wing they have needed for years and never had, or always chose against because of their guard heavy play. |
that's assuming Tuck's reoccurring knee problems don't continuously re-appear.
_________________
For there is always light,
if only we’re brave enough to see it.
If only we’re brave enough to be it.
- Amanda Gorman
|
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63979
Back to top |
|
hangtyme24
Joined: 21 May 2006
Posts: 2445
Back to top |
|
|
|
