RebKell's Junkie Boards

[petrel]

I read an interesting article (link is here) regarding the idea that there is always some player (or coach, or GM) . A quote:

The GM makes the trades and targets the free agents. The coach designs the system. And the players play. On every team, though, there’s one person whose influence, whether he wields it or not, transcends organizational demarcations.

We call the person on that team the "owner" of that team (as opposed to the actual owner). The writer of that article uses three metrics to make the decision regarding which coach, player, or GM "owns" the team in this sense.

Leverage: the more in demand a player or coach is.
Standing: the accrued effects of a player or coach's career track record: how big of a footprint have they left?
Power: in a power struggle between two members of an organization, who could send the other packing?

I decided to apply this to the WNBA. Here's my take. You might have your own takes and I'd love to read them.

Atlanta: Angel McCoughtry. Big in leverage, big in standing (has been with the org since 2009, lots of accolades) and has already sent one (two?) coach/es packing.

Chicago: It would probably be a toss-up between Cappie Pondexter and Courtney Vandersloot, now that Pokey, Elena and Sylvia aren't there anymore. Sloot might be more in demand, but Cappie has more standing. The big question: if either of them went to the GM/owner and said, "it's either her or me," which one goes out the door?

Connecticut: Chiney Ogwumike, provided she stays healthy. I don't think the other players have very much leverage or standing.

Dallas: Skylar Diggins, and this is based entirely on star power.

Indiana: Pokey Chatman, because the hope is that she can somehow put together something that can fill the void of Tamika Catchings.

Los Angeles: That's a tough one, clearly between Nneka Ogwumike and Candace Parker. I suspect that honestly, it would be Ogwumike. Sparks fans need to put in their prayers every night that no such power struggle ever takes place.

Minnesota: Maya Moore, no question. Furthermore, move Moore to any other WNBA team and she "owns" that team too after her arrival.

New York: Bill Laimbeer, now that his friend Isiah Thomas is around. If Tina Charles were to say, "It's Trader Bill, or me," I find it hard to believe that they'd get rid of Laimbeer. Although Trader Bill was once fired and re-hired. Who knows what goes on in the New York Org?

Phoenix: Diana Taurasi. Has been with Phoenix since Day 1, and what other team wouldn't snap her up?

San Antonio: no one owns that team. Everyone is expendable.

Seattle: Sue Bird. Not the best player on the team anymore, but she and Diana T. have more standing than just about anyone. Do you really think she'd lose a power struggle?

Washington: Elena Delle Donne. Mike Thibault just thinks he owns the team. This year, he finds out otherwise.

[sigur3]

[Nerd2]

[justintyme]

I don't agree that it is Maya in Minnesota. I think it is Cheryl Reeve.

_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA

[Richyyy]

[cattekin]

[Nerd2]

[MuneravenMN]

[J-Spoon]

I don't think there are many players who "own" their team, I just don't think the players are in a powerful enough position in the W, you got Taurasi in PX, Angel in Atlanta but I'm not sure that will be true anymore after this seasons, maybe EDD in Washington, maybe Moore in Minnesota. But the truth is with how the W is still a little fragile in its standing the teams themselves are more the owners, it is good to have star players and good coaches because that leads to winning and success, but pretty much all teams will make whatever moves are necisary for survival. Most teams would throw over any and everyone if it is better for team success. DT is good for PX because she is a great player and very popular, for PX management to give that up they would have to get someone who is better or more popular, that is hard to do, so that is why DT is one of the closest thing to a player who owns hr team. If she did something that hurt her popularity in PX and an amazing trade offer came along she would be gone, which is true of even the best and most popular players. As important as Diggins in to Dallas if LA offered N. Ogwumike and C. Gray lets say for her, Skylar would be packing her bags.

I don't think Indy, Conn, SA, or Chicago have anything close to a player with that status, they might have some vets but they are simply teams in transistion and the team itself out weighs any sort of owner mentality IMO.

Now if were talking franchise player, the player the team is built around, then you get

Atl Angel
Conn Ogwumike
Chicago sorry no one, they have some good players but decisions aren't being made around those players, their previous franchise player just left.
Indy same as above the franchise player just retired
NY Charles
Was EDD

LA Parker (I love Ogwumike but it is still Parker pretty much until she leaves IMO)
Minny Moore
PX DT transitioning to Griner in the near future maybe even starting this season
Seattle Stewart (it used to be Bird, actually it use to be LJ but it is Stewart from here on out)
Dallas Diggins (she is more the face of the franchise, but she is the closest thing they got to a franchise player)
SA no one, might be Jefferson or the #1 pick from this draft but at the moment they simply do not have a franchise player

[norwester]

Brian Agler talked about this back in the day in Seattle. Just as an example of how an organization (like Seattle, LA or Minnesota...and others) might run.

He would work closely with the GM-type, but when deciding on team moves, they'd also "consult" with Lauren Jackson and Sue Bird. So very collaborative. I'm pretty certain that Brian probably got what he asked for more or less, but that he also didn't ask for things that would rile up the other parties.

But then, when you're a coach of a team with a player like LJ or Sue in their primes, it's to your advantage to both keep them happy (and giving someone a listen and keeping them in the loop can go a LONG way towards this).

A lot depends on the personalities involved. It's probable that if either player had wanted Brian gone back then, he would have been. And these days it's been interesting to see players wield a little more power than it seems they did actively in the early days.

Does anyone have examples before the more high-profile sit-outs of the past several years? I'm thinking first 10 years type stuff.

_________________
Don't you know the plural of "anecdote" is "data"?

[zune69]

The only players who own their teams are:

Moore
Delledonne
Charles
Stewart ?
Mccoughtry ?

They can get management to trade any player on their roster.

Parker can't get Nneka traded,and vice versa.

Taurasi can't get Griner traded,and vice versa.

[pilight]

[ClayK]

[Libra_Girl]

[Mysticsfan12]