RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

2001 vs 2013

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » WNBA
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 57471
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/18/18 10:00 am    ::: 2001 vs 2013 Reply Reply with quote

The class of 2001 has long been considered the gold standard of non-ABL drafts. Through five seasons, the class of 2013 is still hanging right with 2001 in virtually every measure.

Through five seasons...

Each class had one MVP award. 2001 had more close calls (2nd three times, 3rd twice, and 5th once) than 2013 (3rd once, 4th twice, 5th once).

2013 had two DPOY awards to 2001's one.

The All Defense teams didn't exist until 2005, so it's not really a fair comparison. However, the 2005 team (in 2001's 5th season) had two 2001s on the first team and two on the second team. 2013, through five seasons, also has two first and two second team All Defense nods.

Each class has two MIP awards.

2001 had a finals MVP, 2013 didn't.

2001 had six first team and three second team All WNBA nods. 2013 had five first team and three second team.

2001 had 11 1000 point scorers and two 2000 point scorers. 2013 had 10 1000 point scorers and three 2000 point scorers.

Each class had two scoring titles.

Each class has 16 All Star appearances (and each had four all star games, no game in 2004 or 2016).

2013 has 23 POW awards, 2001 had 17. However, there was only one POW per week during 2001's first five seasons compared to two per week during 2013's first five.


2001 has a slight edge, but it's not a runaway. 2013 still has a shot at ending up as the best draft class ever.



_________________
Don't take no rhythm,
Don't take no style
Gotta thirst for killin',
Grab your vial
dtsnms



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 18815



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/18/18 11:09 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Interesting, especially when you consider 33% of the first round picks in 2013 are out of the league (even more if you include Bone), and only 11 of 36 total picks are in the league.


WNBA 09



Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 7531
Location: Dallas , Texas


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/18/18 11:27 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Would have been better if you posted both draft classes .



_________________
3-Time WNBA Champion-3-Time National Champion-4-Time Olympic Champion....And Yes DT "We Got Confeti" lol
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 57471
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/18/18 11:30 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

dtsnms wrote:
Interesting, especially when you consider 33% of the first round picks in 2013 are out of the league (even more if you include Bone), and only 11 of 36 total picks are in the league.


25% of 2001s first rounders were done by 2005, including the Rookie of the Year. 19 of 64 picks lasted past five years, a lower percentage than 2013, and that's including weirdness like Kelly Santos randomly appearing in Seattle in 2008 after six years out of the league.

The class of 2001 continued to pile up awards at a prodigious rate after 2005. It will be hard for 2013 (or any class) to match them. This is the first class that's still in the ballpark this far in.



_________________
Don't take no rhythm,
Don't take no style
Gotta thirst for killin',
Grab your vial
PUmatty



Joined: 10 Nov 2004
Posts: 14411
Location: Chicago


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/18/18 11:34 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The 2001 class had two players in the running as GOAT or almost-GOAT, and then a next tier of Douglas, Nolan, and Taylor as outstanding players.

2013 has three incredibly strong players at the top, any two could develop to be looked at like Jackson and Catchings by the time they retire. Or all three could. Or none could.

What I see as the qualitative difference is the lack of the Douglas, Nolan, Taylor tier. If you dip down to five players, you have .... Alex Bentley and Emma Messeman? Sugar Rodgers and Tayler Hill?

Douglas took a bit longer to develop so was good after 5 years but not as good as we think of her in her prime, so it is possible that one of the others will develop like that in the next couple of years. On the other hand, in 2006 Penny Taylor was MVP of the World Championships.


blaase22



Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Posts: 3719
Location: Paradise


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/18/18 12:09 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

dtsnms wrote:
Interesting, especially when you consider 33% of the first round picks in 2013 are out of the league (even more if you include Bone), and only 11 of 36 total picks are in the league.

Weren't there more teams back then also?


Richyyy



Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 20675
Location: London


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/18/18 12:10 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I would tend to agree that there's significantly more depth in the 2001 class. Even once you go past that second tier, and the rest of the first-rounders who produced (Riley, Ferdinand, Abrosimova, both Millers), you've got players like Schumacher, Sutton-Brown, Buescher, Wyckoff and Burse who were solid rotation players (in many cases starters) for a number of years in the WNBA. Unless several players bounce back into the league, 2013 isn't going to have that.

But yeah, 2013 is a really good class.



_________________
Independent WNBA coverage: http://www.wnbalien.com/
WNBA 09



Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 7531
Location: Dallas , Texas


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/18/18 12:13 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Richyyy wrote:
I would tend to agree that there's significantly more depth in the 2001 class. Even once you go past that second tier, and the rest of the first-rounders who produced (Riley, Ferdinand, Abrosimova, both Millers), you've got players like Schumacher, Sutton-Brown, Buescher, Wyckoff and Burse who were solid rotation players (in many cases starters) for a number of years in the WNBA. Unless several players bounce back into the league, 2013 isn't going to have that.

But yeah, 2013 is a really good class.


But the talent level allowed those players to become those solid rotation players. I dont know if the league has room like it did back then .



_________________
3-Time WNBA Champion-3-Time National Champion-4-Time Olympic Champion....And Yes DT "We Got Confeti" lol
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 57471
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/18/18 12:14 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

PUmatty wrote:
The 2001 class had two players in the running as GOAT or almost-GOAT, and then a next tier of Douglas, Nolan, and Taylor as outstanding players.

2013 has three incredibly strong players at the top, any two could develop to be looked at like Jackson and Catchings by the time they retire. Or all three could. Or none could.

What I see as the qualitative difference is the lack of the Douglas, Nolan, Taylor tier. If you dip down to five players, you have .... Alex Bentley and Emma Messeman? Sugar Rodgers and Tayler Hill?

Douglas took a bit longer to develop so was good after 5 years but not as good as we think of her in her prime, so it is possible that one of the others will develop like that in the next couple of years. On the other hand, in 2006 Penny Taylor was MVP of the World Championships.


I don't disagree. 2001 was an absurdly deep class. Svet Abrosimova played 10 years, scored 2400+ points, and won a championship. She's not one of the ten best players in the class.

I just thought it was worth noting that five years in 2013 isn't completely outclassed like every other draft crop has been.

And, yes, I could see Meesseman develop into the equal of Penny Taylor. Layshia Clarendon is from the class of 2013 and she's just starting to blossom. Is it going to be 2001 deep? No. But 2013 might have more star power, and unlike top heavy classes such as 2002 and 2006 it has enough depth to potentially make it a contest.



_________________
Don't take no rhythm,
Don't take no style
Gotta thirst for killin',
Grab your vial
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 5034
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/18/18 2:02 pm    ::: Re: 2001 vs 2013 Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
The class of 2001 has long been considered the gold standard of non-ABL drafts.


By whom?

pilight wrote:
Through five seasons, the class of 2013 is still hanging right with 2001 in virtually every measure.


Who determined the applicable measures, their relative weights, and why other measures were left out?

**************

These questions are partially rhetorical and need not be answered. I understand the methodology to be pilight's subjective construct.

Under the pilight methodology, how does the class of 2008 fare? It was hyped, at least a priori.

Personally, I think the metric that should count is total points scored by the class, but have no idea what class that would be. It would favor times when there were more teams in the WNBA.

Well, maybe I should factor in total rebounds and total assists as well as total points under some sort of formula. Perhaps a class "efficiency" metric. I'm more impressed by objectively quantifiable performance statistics rather than awards based on subjective or collective voting by elites (or, ugh, fan based voting).

That's a lot of effort and good work, in any event.
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 57471
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/18/18 2:53 pm    ::: Re: 2001 vs 2013 Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:
Under the pilight methodology, how does the class of 2008 fare? It was hyped, at least a priori.


2008 is a good class. It's a bit behind the curve, however.

Through five seasons

MVP one
Close calls (2nd once, 3rd once, 5th once)
DPY one
All Defense four 1st team, three 2nd team
MIP two
FMVP zero
All WNBA three first, four second
1000 point scorers nine
2000 point scorers three
Scoring titles zero
POW 17 (like 2013, they had two per week throughout)
All Star six (in only two games, no ASG in 2008, 2010, or 2012)



_________________
Don't take no rhythm,
Don't take no style
Gotta thirst for killin',
Grab your vial
mercfan3



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 18371



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/18/18 3:20 pm    ::: Re: 2001 vs 2013 Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
GlennMacGrady wrote:
Under the pilight methodology, how does the class of 2008 fare? It was hyped, at least a priori.


2008 is a good class. It's a bit behind the curve, however.

Through five seasons

MVP one
Close calls (2nd once, 3rd once, 5th once)
DPY one
All Defense four 1st team, three 2nd team
MIP two
FMVP zero
All WNBA three first, four second
1000 point scorers nine
2000 point scorers three
Scoring titles zero
POW 17 (like 2013, they had two per week throughout)
All Star six (in only two games, no ASG in 2008, 2010, or 2012)


What about 2004?

I'd think a draft class of Taurasi, Beard, Whalen, Wright and Brunson has to stack up pretty well..



_________________
“Anyone point out that a Donald Trump anagram is ‘Lord Dampnut’”- Colin Mochrie
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 57471
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/18/18 3:58 pm    ::: Re: 2001 vs 2013 Reply Reply with quote

mercfan3 wrote:

What about 2004?

I'd think a draft class of Taurasi, Beard, Whalen, Wright and Brunson has to stack up pretty well..


Shereka Wright didn't contribute much for the class of 2004.

Through five seasons...

MVP zero
Close calls (2nd once, 3rd once, 4th once, 5th once)
DPY zero
All Defense one 1st team, four 2nd team. Note that the All Defense teams started in 2005, their 2nd season.
MIP two
FMVP zero
All WNBA three 1st team, two 2nd team
1000 point scorers eight
2000 point scorers two
scoring titles two
All Star seven (in three games, no ASG in 2004 or 2008)
POW 20. Two per week started in 2007, their 4th season.



_________________
Don't take no rhythm,
Don't take no style
Gotta thirst for killin',
Grab your vial
snlMINAJ



Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 754
Location: Connecticut


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/19/18 6:25 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

tanisha wright?


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 57471
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/19/18 8:00 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

snlMINAJ wrote:
tanisha wright?


The 2005 draft doesn't have the star power to stay in this fight



_________________
Don't take no rhythm,
Don't take no style
Gotta thirst for killin',
Grab your vial
toad455



Joined: 16 Nov 2005
Posts: 17609



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/19/18 8:44 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I always thought the 2004 draft was pretty deep with Taurasi, Whalen, Beard, & Brunson as the core players from that draft.



_________________
LET'S GO LIBERTY!!!!!!

Twitter: @TBRBWAY
Aladyyn



Joined: 23 Jul 2017
Posts: 1173
Location: Czech Republic


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/19/18 1:13 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

PUmatty wrote:
The 2001 class had two players in the running as GOAT or almost-GOAT, and then a next tier of Douglas, Nolan, and Taylor as outstanding players.

2013 has three incredibly strong players at the top, any two could develop to be looked at like Jackson and Catchings by the time they retire. Or all three could. Or none could.

What I see as the qualitative difference is the lack of the Douglas, Nolan, Taylor tier. If you dip down to five players, you have .... Alex Bentley and Emma Messeman? Sugar Rodgers and Tayler Hill?

Douglas took a bit longer to develop so was good after 5 years but not as good as we think of her in her prime, so it is possible that one of the others will develop like that in the next couple of years. On the other hand, in 2006 Penny Taylor was MVP of the World Championships.


I'd see the tiers as:

Griner/EDD

Diggins/Meesseman


Hill/Rodgers


CamrnCrz1974



Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 17121
Location: Phoenix


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/23/18 11:35 am    ::: Re: 2001 vs 2013 Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:
pilight wrote:
The class of 2001 has long been considered the gold standard of non-ABL drafts.


By whom?


Anyone who has followed the WNBA and is knowledgeable about the game.


#Occasionalwnbafan



Joined: 01 Mar 2012
Posts: 1360



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/23/18 7:13 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Aladyyn wrote:
PUmatty wrote:
The 2001 class had two players in the running as GOAT or almost-GOAT, and then a next tier of Douglas, Nolan, and Taylor as outstanding players.

2013 has three incredibly strong players at the top, any two could develop to be looked at like Jackson and Catchings by the time they retire. Or all three could. Or none could.

What I see as the qualitative difference is the lack of the Douglas, Nolan, Taylor tier. If you dip down to five players, you have .... Alex Bentley and Emma Messeman? Sugar Rodgers and Tayler Hill?

Douglas took a bit longer to develop so was good after 5 years but not as good as we think of her in her prime, so it is possible that one of the others will develop like that in the next couple of years. On the other hand, in 2006 Penny Taylor was MVP of the World Championships.


I'd see the tiers as:

Griner/EDD

Diggins/Meesseman


Hill/Rodgers

Diggins is better then Meesseman, to me Diggins is almost near that BG/EDD line, if she can get the wings on a deep playoff run, and MVP should would be even closer.
WNBA 09



Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 7531
Location: Dallas , Texas


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/23/18 7:15 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

#Occasionalwnbafan wrote:
Aladyyn wrote:
PUmatty wrote:
The 2001 class had two players in the running as GOAT or almost-GOAT, and then a next tier of Douglas, Nolan, and Taylor as outstanding players.

2013 has three incredibly strong players at the top, any two could develop to be looked at like Jackson and Catchings by the time they retire. Or all three could. Or none could.

What I see as the qualitative difference is the lack of the Douglas, Nolan, Taylor tier. If you dip down to five players, you have .... Alex Bentley and Emma Messeman? Sugar Rodgers and Tayler Hill?

Douglas took a bit longer to develop so was good after 5 years but not as good as we think of her in her prime, so it is possible that one of the others will develop like that in the next couple of years. On the other hand, in 2006 Penny Taylor was MVP of the World Championships.


I'd see the tiers as:

Griner/EDD

Diggins/Meesseman


Hill/Rodgers

Diggins is better then Meesseman, to me Diggins is almost near that BG/EDD line, if she can get the wings on a deep playoff run, and MVP should would be even closer.


+1



_________________
3-Time WNBA Champion-3-Time National Champion-4-Time Olympic Champion....And Yes DT "We Got Confeti" lol
Aladyyn



Joined: 23 Jul 2017
Posts: 1173
Location: Czech Republic


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/24/18 5:43 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

#Occasionalwnbafan wrote:
Aladyyn wrote:
PUmatty wrote:
The 2001 class had two players in the running as GOAT or almost-GOAT, and then a next tier of Douglas, Nolan, and Taylor as outstanding players.

2013 has three incredibly strong players at the top, any two could develop to be looked at like Jackson and Catchings by the time they retire. Or all three could. Or none could.

What I see as the qualitative difference is the lack of the Douglas, Nolan, Taylor tier. If you dip down to five players, you have .... Alex Bentley and Emma Messeman? Sugar Rodgers and Tayler Hill?

Douglas took a bit longer to develop so was good after 5 years but not as good as we think of her in her prime, so it is possible that one of the others will develop like that in the next couple of years. On the other hand, in 2006 Penny Taylor was MVP of the World Championships.


I'd see the tiers as:

Griner/EDD

Diggins/Meesseman


Hill/Rodgers

Diggins is better then Meesseman, to me Diggins is almost near that BG/EDD line, if she can get the wings on a deep playoff run, and MVP should would be even closer.


I see them both as Tier 2 players, with Diggins having an advantage in terms of accolades by virtue of not playing the most stacked position in the league. I think Diggins is really good, but very clearly below the true superstars of the game like EDD/Griner and borderline superstars like Stewart/Nneka/JJ.

Best PG in the league? Sure. But post players run this league.


Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » WNBA All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin