View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004 Posts: 67111 Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
Posted: 05/05/18 1:44 pm ::: Welcome to the W.N.B.A.: Good Luck Finding a Job |
Reply |
|
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/05/sports/wnba-los-angeles-sparks.html
Quote: |
Not only are there fewer players in the W.N.B.A., the odds of being drafted are worse than in other sports. According to the N.C.A.A.’s 2018 report, which uses data from the 2016-17 season, 0.9 percent of draft-eligible players were chosen by W.N.B.A. teams, less than the N.B.A. (1.2 percent), the N.F.L. (1.6 percent), M.L.S. (1.4 percent), the N.H.L. (6.4 percent) and M.L.B. (9.5 percent). Including those who joined teams overseas, only 4.9 percent of eligible women’s basketball players played professionally last season, compared with 19.3 percent for men’s basketball. |
_________________ I'm sick and tired of the stories that you always tell
Shakespeare couldn't tell a story that well
See, you're the largest liar that was ever created
You and Pinocchio are probably related
Full of criss-crossed fits, you lie all the time
Your tongue should be embarrassed, you're a threat to mankind
|
|
WfanFrJmp
Joined: 24 May 2016 Posts: 1427
Back to top |
Posted: 05/05/18 2:22 pm ::: Re: Welcome to the W.N.B.A.: Good Luck Finding a Job |
Reply |
|
pilight wrote: |
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/05/sports/wnba-los-angeles-sparks.html
Quote: |
Not only are there fewer players in the W.N.B.A., the odds of being drafted are worse than in other sports. According to the N.C.A.A.’s 2018 report, which uses data from the 2016-17 season, 0.9 percent of draft-eligible players were chosen by W.N.B.A. teams, less than the N.B.A. (1.2 percent), the N.F.L. (1.6 percent), M.L.S. (1.4 percent), the N.H.L. (6.4 percent) and M.L.B. (9.5 percent). Including those who joined teams overseas, only 4.9 percent of eligible women’s basketball players played professionally last season, compared with 19.3 percent for men’s basketball. |
|
Yeah, I just read this. It's crazy! It's not going to be pretty over the next few weeks. I know this is not the point of the story, but they mention the about the need for the players to actually watch the W...to be familiar with the players and have an edge. It's so odd to me that they don't, particularly those who desire to play professionally.
|
|
Randy
Joined: 08 Oct 2011 Posts: 10911
Back to top |
Posted: 05/05/18 3:43 pm ::: Re: Welcome to the W.N.B.A.: Good Luck Finding a Job |
Reply |
|
WfanFrJmp wrote: |
pilight wrote: |
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/05/sports/wnba-los-angeles-sparks.html
Quote: |
Not only are there fewer players in the W.N.B.A., the odds of being drafted are worse than in other sports. According to the N.C.A.A.’s 2018 report, which uses data from the 2016-17 season, 0.9 percent of draft-eligible players were chosen by W.N.B.A. teams, less than the N.B.A. (1.2 percent), the N.F.L. (1.6 percent), M.L.S. (1.4 percent), the N.H.L. (6.4 percent) and M.L.B. (9.5 percent). Including those who joined teams overseas, only 4.9 percent of eligible women’s basketball players played professionally last season, compared with 19.3 percent for men’s basketball. |
|
Yeah, I just read this. It's crazy! It's not going to be pretty over the next few weeks. I know this is not the point of the story, but they mention the about the need for the players to actually watch the W...to be familiar with the players and have an edge. It's so odd to me that they don't, particularly those who desire to play professionally. |
They are too busy watching LeBron, KD, and Stef.
|
|
Ay Mate
Joined: 12 Nov 2016 Posts: 1280
Back to top |
Posted: 05/05/18 4:09 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
If the younger players can’t be bothered watching the WNBA, then fuck them, I hope they don’t get drafted and make WNBA teams. If young female basketball players don’t follow the WNBA first and foremost, that’s their problem. They are idiots.
|
|
toad455
Joined: 16 Nov 2005 Posts: 22478 Location: NJ
Back to top |
Posted: 05/05/18 4:39 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Expansion!!
_________________ LET'S GO LIBERTY!!!!!!
Twitter: @TBRBWAY
|
|
WNBA 09
Joined: 26 Jun 2009 Posts: 12608 Location: Dallas , Texas
Back to top |
Posted: 05/05/18 11:28 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
toad455 wrote: |
Expansion!! |
This is starting to seem inevitable...
_________________ 3-Time WNBA Champion-3-Time National Champion-4-Time Olympic Champion....And Yes DT "We Got Confeti" lol
|
|
Happycappie25
Joined: 07 Feb 2006 Posts: 4174 Location: QUEENS!!!!
Back to top |
Posted: 05/06/18 6:37 am ::: |
Reply |
|
WNBA 09 wrote: |
toad455 wrote: |
Expansion!! |
This is starting to seem inevitable... |
It is the easiest solution but it's a chicken or egg issue for the league...we do need expansion as the talent pool is deeper...but the ownership is not there and we needed a Houdini save to avoid contraction this year...I do think this will come up in cba talks...but it's tricky enough that I don't wanna hijack this thread but I agree expansion will need to happen at some point...too many good players not getting a shot
_________________ "Leave it to the NCAA women's basketball committee to turn a glass slipper into glass ceiling" Graham Hays
|
|
NYL_WNBA_FAN
Joined: 28 May 2007 Posts: 14097
Back to top |
Posted: 05/06/18 7:09 am ::: |
Reply |
|
I've enjoyed the 12 teams from the standpoint of competitiveness. Even the bottom teams can compete with the top teams which increases the likelihood of seeing good games no matter who plays. That said, every team now has at least one star player. Many teams have two. The best teams have 3 of what you would consider franchise-type players or close to it. If you roll back ten years, an all-star caliber PG like Chelsea Gray in a 16-team league might have been the best player on a team and that team's franchise player. On LA, she is awesome but still a clear third behind the big two. I think a move up to 14 teams would be ideal from a competitive standpoint. 24 more players would be enough to gradually spread the talent pool around without hurting the parity that we see today.
_________________ The poster formerly known as LibWNBAFan.
|
|
Aladyyn
Joined: 23 Jul 2017 Posts: 1566 Location: Czech Republic
Back to top |
Posted: 05/06/18 8:06 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Ay Mate wrote: |
If the younger players can’t be bothered watching the WNBA, then fuck them, I hope they don’t get drafted and make WNBA teams. If young female basketball players don’t follow the WNBA first and foremost, that’s their problem. They are idiots. |
This is harsh but 100% true.
Expansion will spread the talent pool too thin. There is lots of talent at the top but honestly the role players in this league are pretty bad.
|
|
toad455
Joined: 16 Nov 2005 Posts: 22478 Location: NJ
Back to top |
Posted: 05/06/18 8:56 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Aladyyn wrote: |
Ay Mate wrote: |
If the younger players can’t be bothered watching the WNBA, then fuck them, I hope they don’t get drafted and make WNBA teams. If young female basketball players don’t follow the WNBA first and foremost, that’s their problem. They are idiots. |
This is harsh but 100% true.
Expansion will spread the talent pool too thin. There is lots of talent at the top but honestly the role players in this league are pretty bad. |
I've said this before, but the league was at 16 teams from 2000-2002 with less talent and the level of play wasn't anywhere what it is today. You expand to 14 and basically anyone who's a 6th woman on their team becomes a starter. We'll see who are the last cuts in a week or so, but those players would be the ones to make a roster if the league were at 14 teams. And who knows, maybe players like Ivory Latta, Tiffany Jackson, etc. wouldn't be forced into retirement under this scenario.
_________________ LET'S GO LIBERTY!!!!!!
Twitter: @TBRBWAY
|
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006 Posts: 63930
Back to top |
Posted: 05/06/18 9:50 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Tiffany Jackson wasn’t forced into retirement. She grabbed a new opportunity when it was presented. Probably saw the writing on the wall for the coming years.
_________________ Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
|
|
bballjunkie
Joined: 12 Aug 2014 Posts: 785
Back to top |
Posted: 05/06/18 10:03 am ::: |
Reply |
|
So duck the younger players huh. Well these younger players, some of who have huge followings on social media tend to love the game until they are ripped apart, shit on, go to trainingcamps and the coach doesn’t even have the decency to talk to them as they are sent packing etc. Seems that maybe the whole system is a problem. If we want the youngins to keep their love and interest in the game, why not focus a little more on making it a more friendly atmosphere. As fans we complain about the lack of info and contact etc. imagine how they all feel.
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005 Posts: 11215
Back to top |
Posted: 05/06/18 11:29 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Luckily, at least from my point of view, expansion is unlikely because of the $2 million annual loss that can be expected, and the $0 value of a franchise. (Yes, some teams turn a small profit, but a new team would take time to establish financially.)
The reason I say "luckily" is that there is not enough talent to stock two new teams that would be competitive in a couple years -- barring players demanding trades, etc. (in which case some other team would be bad).
The quality of the product is a major aspect of the WNBA, and any business, and expansion will make the quality worse. The question, of course, is how much worse -- my sense is "substantially" though reasonable people can disagree on this.
_________________ Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
Nixtreefan
Joined: 14 Nov 2012 Posts: 2539
Back to top |
Posted: 05/06/18 11:33 am ::: |
Reply |
|
I disagree. There is talent but talent needs good coaching and if you think there is good coaching throughout the W then I may wear a toupee on my bald head and accept ridicule.
|
|
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010 Posts: 9770
Back to top |
Posted: 05/06/18 12:38 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
ClayK wrote: |
Luckily, at least from my point of view, expansion is unlikely because of the $2 million annual loss that can be expected, and the $0 value of a franchise. (Yes, some teams turn a small profit, but a new team would take time to establish financially.)
The reason I say "luckily" is that there is not enough talent to stock two new teams that would be competitive in a couple years -- barring players demanding trades, etc. (in which case some other team would be bad).
The quality of the product is a major aspect of the WNBA, and any business, and expansion will make the quality worse. The question, of course, is how much worse -- my sense is "substantially" though reasonable people can disagree on this. |
12 teams versus 14 teams doesn't appear to negative effect the average viewer - or at least it does not cancel out the increased interest from more metro areas being involved. Wikipedia says ESPN/ESPN2 viewership averaged 248,000 in the 14-team 2008 season. 12-team 2017 was the lowest average TV viewership ever (171,000), even lower than previous low of 12-team 2012, which was believed to be hurt by fewer games shown and the London Olympic games.
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004 Posts: 67111 Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
Posted: 05/06/18 1:04 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
ClayK wrote: |
The reason I say "luckily" is that there is not enough talent to stock two new teams that would be competitive in a couple years -- barring players demanding trades, etc. (in which case some other team would be bad) |
League history doesn't support this statement. We had 16 teams from 2000-2002. 13 of them made the playoffs during those three seasons. Two of the others got there in 2003, when we had 14 teams. The league has had 10 expansion teams in its history. 70% of those teams were playoff teams within their first three seasons.
_________________ I'm sick and tired of the stories that you always tell
Shakespeare couldn't tell a story that well
See, you're the largest liar that was ever created
You and Pinocchio are probably related
Full of criss-crossed fits, you lie all the time
Your tongue should be embarrassed, you're a threat to mankind
|
|
Richyyy
Joined: 17 Nov 2005 Posts: 24407 Location: London
Back to top |
Posted: 05/06/18 2:35 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
pilight wrote: |
ClayK wrote: |
The reason I say "luckily" is that there is not enough talent to stock two new teams that would be competitive in a couple years -- barring players demanding trades, etc. (in which case some other team would be bad) |
League history doesn't support this statement. We had 16 teams from 2000-2002. 13 of them made the playoffs during those three seasons. Two of the others got there in 2003, when we had 14 teams. The league has had 10 expansion teams in its history. 70% of those teams were playoff teams within their first three seasons. |
What counts as a good or 'competitive' team, anyway? There were only two, maybe three teams ever going to win the championship last year barring catastrophic injury issues. But there were a maximum of two teams who were ever really out of playoff contention until the very final days. Having 14 (or even 16) instead of 12 probably doesn't change any of that very much.
And as ClayK has often pointed out, a city/area having some interest in the WNBA rather than absolutely none is often driven by having a team in the area. More teams, more interested areas. Which should only be good. |
|
toad455
Joined: 16 Nov 2005 Posts: 22478 Location: NJ
Back to top |
Posted: 05/06/18 3:12 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
The Bay Area, Tennessee, Houston, Cleveland, Portland all have or had a fan base to support women's basketball. There's definitely worthy cities to support a team, just need a few committed ownership groups. Finding one for the Liberty in New York is probably the league's priority this season/off-season.
_________________ LET'S GO LIBERTY!!!!!!
Twitter: @TBRBWAY
|
|
cthskzfn
Joined: 21 Nov 2004 Posts: 12851 Location: In a world where a PSYCHOpath like Trump isn't potus.
Back to top |
Posted: 05/06/18 6:28 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
It seems to be hard for some W fans to understand that there is, relatively speaking, little interest in the sport.
The fact that the league must be run in the summer is the first clue. That salaries are pathetic is another. TV ratings drive home the point.
Expansion is the last thing the league needs, imo. If anything, it should lose 2 more teams to continue to improve the product and give its fans mo better ball.
In the meantime, forget about it becoming something other than a niche sport/league. Never gonna happen, unfortunately.
_________________ Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005 Posts: 11215
Back to top |
Posted: 05/06/18 6:36 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Richyyy wrote: |
pilight wrote: |
ClayK wrote: |
The reason I say "luckily" is that there is not enough talent to stock two new teams that would be competitive in a couple years -- barring players demanding trades, etc. (in which case some other team would be bad) |
League history doesn't support this statement. We had 16 teams from 2000-2002. 13 of them made the playoffs during those three seasons. Two of the others got there in 2003, when we had 14 teams. The league has had 10 expansion teams in its history. 70% of those teams were playoff teams within their first three seasons. |
What counts as a good or 'competitive' team, anyway? There were only two, maybe three teams ever going to win the championship last year barring catastrophic injury issues. But there were a maximum of two teams who were ever really out of playoff contention until the very final days. Having 14 (or even 16) instead of 12 probably doesn't change any of that very much.
And as ClayK has often pointed out, a city/area having some interest in the WNBA rather than absolutely none is often driven by having a team in the area. More teams, more interested areas. Which should only be good. |
Excellent point, as are the others. I will concede that perhaps you are right, but I think a higher quality of play is better in the long run than a short-term bump in ratings.
The coaching aspect is one I hadn't thought of either, but it's interesting too.
_________________ Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
Richyyy
Joined: 17 Nov 2005 Posts: 24407 Location: London
Back to top |
Posted: 05/06/18 7:17 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
cthskzfn wrote: |
It seems to be hard for some W fans to understand that there is, relatively speaking, little interest in the sport.
The fact that the league must be run in the summer is the first clue. That salaries are pathetic is another. TV ratings drive home the point.
Expansion is the last thing the league needs, imo. If anything, it should lose 2 more teams to continue to improve the product and give its fans mo better ball.
In the meantime, forget about it becoming something other than a niche sport/league. Never gonna happen, unfortunately. |
I think we're all pretty well aware that this is a niche sport with limited interest. Does that mean everyone should give up on it ever being more than that? Sports do grow in interest. Since I was a kid, America's lack of interest in soccer was a running joke. Now you've got MLS surviving for decades, thriving in some places, and American sports sites and writers actually paying attention to the Premier League and Champions League. Things do change.
As for shrinking the league to improve the product, at what point does tedium become a bigger issue than 'quality of basketball'? Because surely, theoretically, if all we were interested in was the quality of the play we'd only need 24 players - two teams, playing each other over and over again. But it'd be great basketball, because it'd only be the best 24 players on the planet. Personally, I'd be bored to fucking tears. Even with the current twelve, and obviously as a big fan, I'm often left thinking things like "wait, didn't we watch Atlanta play Chicago last week?" It gets tedious watching the same damn teams play each other repeatedly. I'd like four more teams just to increase the variety. Different teams take on personalities, create their own narratives, and even have their own playing styles to make the league more interesting.
Once we had a few years to spread the talent base back out - because expansion teams inevitably suck to start with - I don't think the quality of play would be much different. We'd recalibrate on the fly as to what a good player was, and who was an effective role player, or whatever. And because stars would still work themselves into clumps on good teams, just like we've seen repeatedly in the NBA over recent decades, we'd still get top quality play at the top end. Maybe LA's hypothetical backcourt would've been Sims/Williams instead of Gray/Sims, or Minnesota would've had Sugar Rodgers on the perimeter or Damiris Dantas at center, but we'd still get star teams. Then a load of middling ones and a few crappy ones. The league would cope. |
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005 Posts: 11215
Back to top |
Posted: 05/07/18 9:22 am ::: |
Reply |
|
The partnership with ESPN is, in many ways, keeping the league alive, so ESPN's input is going to be paid attention to.
For ESPN, the national ratings are the key, and regional success is secondary. Given how ESPN promotes sports, it would seem they would be OK as long as the stars shine. Then again, there is a level of familiarity with teams that drives ratings as well (UConn, anyone?) and more teams might make marketing harder.
Expansion would absolutely help regionally, but ESPN could be a roadblock.
All that said, though, if six prospective owners arrived with checkbooks out, we'd have an 18-team league in 2019.
_________________ Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
Richyyy
Joined: 17 Nov 2005 Posts: 24407 Location: London
Back to top |
Posted: 05/07/18 9:44 am ::: |
Reply |
|
ClayK wrote: |
All that said, though, if six prospective owners arrived with checkbooks out, we'd have an 18-team league in 2019. |
I would suggest that a significant part of the problem is the general 'expansion' idea. It's not like we saw lots of stories about how Tulsa or San Antonio (or even Detroit, from what I can remember) desperately wanted to get rid of their teams and there was nowhere for them to go. They were just moving, immediately, to new cities and (usually) new owners who wanted them in those new places. So either these owners wanted the chance for their new toy to be competitive quickly, or they were worried that the potential fanbase would lose interest quickly if the team was terrible for it's first couple of years (probably a bit of both). Or the league doesn't actually want to expand beyond 12, so prospective new owners have to wait until a team becomes available.
But what we really need is a good way to make expansion teams competitive without having to wait too long. It's tough, because existing teams don't want to give away good players for nothing, and crappy teams don't want their draft picks dropping just to let in the new teams above them. But I think that's where we need some thought, and some useful ideas. Otherwise, with the regularity of owners deciding they've had enough, prospective new entries are always going to be tempted to wait until an existing team becomes available, rather than starting from scratch. |
|
Randy
Joined: 08 Oct 2011 Posts: 10911
Back to top |
Posted: 05/07/18 10:32 am ::: |
Reply |
|
One way to make expansion teams more successful would be to adjust the expansion draft so that the best team (LA, MN now) would have less players that they could protect than middling teams. Lottery teams could protect more. Expansion teams would also get a lottery pick with some "reasonable" odds.
|
|
toad455
Joined: 16 Nov 2005 Posts: 22478 Location: NJ
Back to top |
Posted: 05/07/18 10:35 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Completely agree that any expansion teams should be put into the lottery.
_________________ LET'S GO LIBERTY!!!!!!
Twitter: @TBRBWAY
|
|
|
|