View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Stormeo
Joined: 14 Jul 2019 Posts: 4701
Back to top |
|
J-Spoon
Joined: 31 Jan 2009 Posts: 6813
Back to top |
Posted: 02/21/21 6:19 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
This throw a wrench in NY's draft plans either Austin was going to fall to 6 or she was going to knock one of the other prominent posts (Collier, mack, Kuier) to 6
Now I have to root for Collier to suck the rest of the season so she can fall to 6
it is possible that Atl and Indy go wing/guard and it is a little hard to believe that Dallas goes 3 posts with their first 3 picks (less hard if Kuier decides to defer for a year) but it is possible all 3 are gone and Ny is looking at
Walker, Rupert, Perry
or going wing/guard (with a couple possibly off the board already) Dungee, Guirantes or Westbrook at 6, maybe go small with a Evans? Does Davis shoot it well enough to be an option, and we she be any better than Odom or Willoughby?
I guess we could always take Rupert as a deferral pick at 6 and see who between Walker, N. Jones and Perry is available at 17. I kind of like N. Jones is she falling because she isn't a true post?
|
|
root_thing
Joined: 28 Apr 2007 Posts: 7365 Location: Underground
Back to top |
|
root_thing
Joined: 28 Apr 2007 Posts: 7365 Location: Underground
Back to top |
Posted: 02/21/21 11:07 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
J-Spoon wrote: |
This throw a wrench in NY's draft plans either Austin was going to fall to 6 or she was going to knock one of the other prominent posts (Collier, mack, Kuier) to 6
Now I have to root for Collier to suck the rest of the season so she can fall to 6
it is possible that Atl and Indy go wing/guard and it is a little hard to believe that Dallas goes 3 posts with their first 3 picks (less hard if Kuier decides to defer for a year) but it is possible all 3 are gone and Ny is looking at
Walker, Rupert, Perry
or going wing/guard (with a couple possibly off the board already) Dungee, Guirantes or Westbrook at 6, maybe go small with a Evans? Does Davis shoot it well enough to be an option, and we she be any better than Odom or Willoughby?
I guess we could always take Rupert as a deferral pick at 6 and see who between Walker, N. Jones and Perry is available at 17. I kind of like N. Jones is she falling because she isn't a true post? |
Even if Kuier is willing to defer, it doesn't mean the Wings are going to take 3 posts. Their point guard situation isn't set in stone. Maybe they take Evans with #2. She has that clutch scoring ability like Arike. I don't see Atlanta drafting a post after spending a lot of money on Cheyenne and Hawkins. Indiana has already spent 2 lottery picks on McCowan and Cox, and they're still waiting for the big pay-off. Would they do it 3 years in a row? Maybe with Mack, who looks like the most pro-ready of the posts, but doubtful with 19-year-old Kuier which means more waiting. I can definitely see flashy Chelsea Dungee catching someone's fancy in that 2-5 range.
_________________ You can always do something else.
|
|
Stormeo
Joined: 14 Jul 2019 Posts: 4701
Back to top |
Posted: 02/21/21 11:38 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
root_thing wrote: |
Stormeo wrote: |
Proud to say I've seen very, very little of Shyla Heal and am still thinking the Storm take her at #11, if she even lasts 'til then. |
You're suffering from Kitija Laksa Syndrome. Go see a doctor. I suppose there's always the chance that Dan Hughes takes one look at Heal and sees the second coming of Becky Hammon. |
Nah, I think I just have covid. Just kidding. To be fair:
A) I never wanted Laksa to begin with.
B) The Storm have drafted int'l deferral picks in the 1st round the past two Drafts now, so it would make sense if we simply went for the hat trick.
C) Other than Bird waiting to re-sign and maybe someone (Tuck, plz) getting waived, our roster is pretty much set; and
D) We can draft a non-deferral pick or two with one of the two 2RPs that we have. We're probably only gonna cut any non-deferral picks anyway, so why should it have to be a 1RP?
Heal makes sense as the one to choose because she can eventually either back-up or challenge Canada for the starting PG spot once Bird retires – the two timelines of Heal starting her W career & Bird retiring seem to match up with Bird coming back for at least one more year. Plus, there's the Magbegor and now Talbot Aussie connection that probably helps get all of them to show up every year (even in Olympic years, it seems).
Although speaking of Laksa, I know of at least one Latvian prospect in this Draft pool that could hear her name called: Laura Meldere, a 6'2 PF. If we're really gonna keep/try to develop Laksa (although even that isn't a given), perhaps we could draft a fellow Latvian teammate of hers – though probably not in the 1st round, unless she's that talented? Again, I've seen very little of these int'l prospects. Just going with what would make sense within the historical context.
|
|
J-Spoon
Joined: 31 Jan 2009 Posts: 6813
Back to top |
Posted: 02/22/21 12:02 am ::: |
Reply |
|
root_thing wrote: |
J-Spoon wrote: |
This throw a wrench in NY's draft plans either Austin was going to fall to 6 or she was going to knock one of the other prominent posts (Collier, mack, Kuier) to 6
Now I have to root for Collier to suck the rest of the season so she can fall to 6
it is possible that Atl and Indy go wing/guard and it is a little hard to believe that Dallas goes 3 posts with their first 3 picks (less hard if Kuier decides to defer for a year) but it is possible all 3 are gone and Ny is looking at
Walker, Rupert, Perry
or going wing/guard (with a couple possibly off the board already) Dungee, Guirantes or Westbrook at 6, maybe go small with a Evans? Does Davis shoot it well enough to be an option, and we she be any better than Odom or Willoughby?
I guess we could always take Rupert as a deferral pick at 6 and see who between Walker, N. Jones and Perry is available at 17. I kind of like N. Jones is she falling because she isn't a true post? |
Even if Kuier is willing to defer, it doesn't mean the Wings are going to take 3 posts. Their point guard situation isn't set in stone. Maybe they take Evans with #2. She has that clutch scoring ability like Arike. I don't see Atlanta drafting a post after spending a lot of money on Cheyenne and Hawkins. Indiana has already spent 2 lottery picks on McCowan and Cox, and they're still waiting for the big pay-off. Would they do it 3 years in a row? Maybe with Mack, who looks like the most pro-ready of the posts, but doubtful with 19-year-old Kuier which means more waiting. I can definitely see flashy Chelsea Dungee catching someone's fancy in that 2-5 range. |
Yeah I could see some combo of
Davis, Dungee, Guirantes, Onyenwere, Evans and McDonald at 3/4/5
I am just not sure which of the 3 premiere posts fall to 6, probably Kuier
Dallas is hard to figure out, if Ndour doesn't come over or gets traded I could see them taking all 3 posts (It would probably be better to trade for one with more experience).
Their guard situation is weird even with some spill over into the SF spot they have Ogunbowale and Gray, if they aren't going to play either at the 1 they have Harris, Mabrey and Jefferson to work with, besides Gray they can play Thorton and Sabally at the 3. If we assume Sabally is going to start at the 4 you basically have Harrison, Alarie and Gustafson as the other posts.
OK never mind Dallas just has too many picks. I definitely think they take two of the three top posts with picks 1,2 or 5 but it is impossible to figure out the rest.
|
|
J-Spoon
Joined: 31 Jan 2009 Posts: 6813
Back to top |
Posted: 02/22/21 12:18 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Stormeo wrote: |
root_thing wrote: |
Stormeo wrote: |
Proud to say I've seen very, very little of Shyla Heal and am still thinking the Storm take her at #11, if she even lasts 'til then. |
You're suffering from Kitija Laksa Syndrome. Go see a doctor. I suppose there's always the chance that Dan Hughes takes one look at Heal and sees the second coming of Becky Hammon. |
Nah, I think I just have covid. Just kidding. To be fair:
A) I never wanted Laksa to begin with.
B) The Storm have drafted int'l deferral picks in the 1st round the past two Drafts now, so it would make sense if we simply went for the hat trick.
C) Other than Bird waiting to re-sign and maybe someone (Tuck, plz) getting waived, our roster is pretty much set; and
D) We can draft a non-deferral pick or two with one of the two 2RPs that we have. We're probably only gonna cut any non-deferral picks anyway, so why should it have to be a 1RP?
Heal makes sense as the one to choose because she can eventually either back-up or challenge Canada for the starting PG spot once Bird retires – the two timelines of Heal starting her W career & Bird retiring seem to match up with Bird coming back for at least one more year. Plus, there's the Magbegor and now Talbot Aussie connection that probably helps get all of them to show up every year (even in Olympic years, it seems).
Although speaking of Laksa, I know of at least one Latvian prospect in this Draft pool that could hear her name called: Laura Meldere, a 6'2 PF. If we're really gonna keep/try to develop Laksa (although even that isn't a given), perhaps we could draft a fellow Latvian teammate of hers – though probably not in the 1st round, unless she's that talented? Again, I've seen very little of these int'l prospects. Just going with what would make sense within the historical context. |
I have pick 11, 17 and Laksa on the outside looking in ATM in Seattle unless there are money issues
Bird/Canada
Loyd/Prince
KLS/Talbot/Young
Magbegor/Dupree/Tuck
Stewart/Russell
I don't think Young, Talbot, Prince or Tuck can completely relax but I don't see it as a given that Laksa or draft picks can unseat them. (I am not sure they can afford those 12 but there are four rookie contracts and a few TC contract vet minimums so maybe).
I also think Seattle can probably draft someone else at 11 and wait to pick 18 if they want to draft Heal I don't see anyone pick 12-17 as likely to take her.
|
|
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010 Posts: 9663
Back to top |
Posted: 02/22/21 11:56 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Richyyy wrote: |
root_thing wrote: |
Again, I've barely seen Shyla Heal, so I'm not going to pretend I know her game. However, she is 5-6 and an international player. That's two strikes against her just to start with. She would need to be really athletic and/or super-skilled to get picked in the 1st Round. Heal does not look especially athletic to me, and her numbers while solid don't indicate super-skill. So, anyone who projects her into the 1st Round had better have seen her a lot and absolutely love her. Otherwise, on paper, the odds are really bad. |
I'm not going to pretend I've seen lots of Heal - I watched one game. But the counter-arguments to what you put there are a) she's Australian, a group that generally speaking show up pretty regularly to play in the WNBA (it's not like she's French), and b) the 'foreign' element means she's two years younger than most of the US prospects, key development years where younger players usually continue to improve. I wouldn't be hugely surprised to see her go late-1st. |
I thought the international-as-a-negative referred to the fact that being a good international player does not mean you will be good enough for the WNBA (secondarily the not showing up factor), and likely won't.
|
|
root_thing
Joined: 28 Apr 2007 Posts: 7365 Location: Underground
Back to top |
Posted: 02/22/21 12:35 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
I was making a general statement, so it encompasses any perceived negatives associated with foreign players: skill level, attendance, cultural adjustment, etc. Which factor predominates in someone’s mind depends on their personal experience. Someone like Sandy Brondello, who has both played and coached overseas, probably believes more in what she sees from international basketball. I suspect Sandy went hard after Bria Hartley based on what she saw Bria do in Turkey and with the French national team. For Brondello, the concern might be more about players not showing up. On the other hand, coaches who haven’t worked overseas might be more skeptical about the quality of play. Absences are obviously an overall concern -- although with so many Americans changing nationalities for FIBA play, no draft pick is totally safe from future national team duty.
_________________ You can always do something else.
|
|
Randy
Joined: 08 Oct 2011 Posts: 10911
Back to top |
Posted: 02/22/21 12:49 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
root_thing wrote: |
I was making a general statement, so it encompasses any perceived negatives associated with foreign players: skill level, attendance, cultural adjustment, etc. Which factor predominates in someone’s mind depends on their personal experience. Someone like Sandy Brondello, who has both played and coached overseas, probably believes more in what she sees from international basketball. I suspect Sandy went hard after Bria Hartley based on what she saw Bria do in Turkey and with the French national team. For Brondello, the concern might be more about players not showing up. On the other hand, coaches who haven’t worked overseas might be more skeptical about the quality of play. Absences are obviously an overall concern -- although with so many Americans changing nationalities for FIBA play, no draft pick is totally safe from future national team duty. |
It's not like Sandy's US players (Griner, Taurasi) show up every game or every season. In the WNBA attendance is often optional.
|
|
root_thing
Joined: 28 Apr 2007 Posts: 7365 Location: Underground
Back to top |
Posted: 02/22/21 1:09 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Randy wrote: |
It's not like Sandy's US players (Griner, Taurasi) show up every game or every season. In the WNBA attendance is often optional. |
Griner has never missed a season. Obviously, she left early last year but the Wubble was unusual circumstances and she also had mental health issues. Taurasi has only missed one season. That occurred after she appeared for 11 straight years. People can also complain about the tanking season, but I'm sure those absences were approved by management.
_________________ You can always do something else.
|
|
Rock Hard
Joined: 02 Aug 2010 Posts: 5387 Location: Chocolate Paradise
Back to top |
|
RavenDog
Joined: 19 Feb 2007 Posts: 6881 Location: Home
Back to top |
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006 Posts: 63831
Back to top |
|
IM in OC
Joined: 25 Mar 2009 Posts: 999 Location: Orange County, CA
Back to top |
Posted: 02/22/21 5:46 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
I would draft Olaeta from Cal Baptist, or at least invite her to training camp.
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004 Posts: 66993 Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
Posted: 02/22/21 5:57 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
IM in OC wrote: |
I would draft Olaeta from Cal Baptist, or at least invite her to training camp. |
I suspect the days of 5'4 guards in the W are over
_________________ I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006 Posts: 63831
Back to top |
Posted: 02/22/21 6:04 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
pilight wrote: |
IM in OC wrote: |
I would draft Olaeta from Cal Baptist, or at least invite her to training camp. |
I suspect the days of 5'4 guards in the W are over |
Tell that to Reeve. Apparently she made all these acquisitions just to have them led by a second year 5’3 player.
_________________ Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
|
|
jmvcity
Joined: 21 Jun 2013 Posts: 343 Location: Big Apple
Back to top |
Posted: 02/22/21 6:11 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
[quote="pilight"]
IM in OC wrote: |
I suspect the days of 5'4 guards in the W are over |
What about 5'5" guards? I think Rutgers' Diamond Johnson is gonna be a star guard.
|
|
Rock Hard
Joined: 02 Aug 2010 Posts: 5387 Location: Chocolate Paradise
Back to top |
|
myrtle
Joined: 02 May 2008 Posts: 32339
Back to top |
|
Rock Hard
Joined: 02 Aug 2010 Posts: 5387 Location: Chocolate Paradise
Back to top |
Posted: 02/22/21 11:24 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Some people have vision and some people don't. How many players in the WNBA that went to small schools or Mid- Major schools that have performed very well in the league that very few people had a vision of excellence for those players.
_________________ You can win, as long as you keep your head to the SKY! Be OPTIMISTIC!
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005 Posts: 11166
Back to top |
Posted: 02/23/21 9:51 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Rock Hard wrote: |
Some people have vision and some people don't. How many players in the WNBA that went to small schools or Mid- Major schools that have performed very well in the league that very few people had a vision of excellence for those players. |
This is a legit question that may be right up pilight's alley -- what percentage of WNBA players come from P5 schools? And what percentage of WNBA starters come from P5 schools?
_________________ Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
PUmatty
Joined: 10 Nov 2004 Posts: 16365 Location: Chicago
Back to top |
Posted: 02/23/21 10:32 am ::: |
Reply |
|
ClayK wrote: |
Rock Hard wrote: |
Some people have vision and some people don't. How many players in the WNBA that went to small schools or Mid- Major schools that have performed very well in the league that very few people had a vision of excellence for those players. |
This is a legit question that may be right up pilight's alley -- what percentage of WNBA players come from P5 schools? And what percentage of WNBA starters come from P5 schools? |
Not starters, but I did do a quick look at All-Stars. At quick count, there have been 19 All-Stars who attended college at a non-P5 school. I didn't include the couple of players (like Jonquel Jones) who started at a P5 school, then transferred and finished at a mid-major.
I also didn't count UConn as a mid-major. You could make a similar argument about Ticha-era Old Dominion or T-Spoon era LaTech, but I stopped at UConn.
Betty Lennox
Brandy Reed
Jackie Stiles
Adrienne Goodson
Tamika Whitmore
Sancho Lyttle
Sugar Rodgers
Yolanda Griffith
Candice Dupree
Taj McWilliams
Becky Hammon
Elena DelleDonne
Teresa Weatherspoon
Rebekkah Brunson
Ticha Penechiero
Cheryl Ford
Allie Quigley
Vickie Johnson
Courtney Vandersloot
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004 Posts: 66993 Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
Posted: 02/23/21 10:33 am ::: |
Reply |
|
ClayK wrote: |
Rock Hard wrote: |
Some people have vision and some people don't. How many players in the WNBA that went to small schools or Mid- Major schools that have performed very well in the league that very few people had a vision of excellence for those players. |
This is a legit question that may be right up pilight's alley -- what percentage of WNBA players come from P5 schools? And what percentage of WNBA starters come from P5 schools? |
Last season 143 players played in the league. Five didn't attend a US university. 104 finished at a P5 school. 16 went to UConn, which isn't a P5 school but also isn't what you're talking about. That leaves 18 who went to other universities.
Those 18 started 142 games, which represents 10.8% of all WNBA starts last season. Four (Alysha Clark, Candice Dupree, Allie Quigley, Courtney Vandersloot) started every game for their team. Three others (Cheyenne Parker, Kayla Thornton, Courtney Williams) started more than half of their team's games.
NOTE: There are a few gray areas. Louisville is a P5 team now but wasn't when Angel McCoughtry was there, for example. I generally considered the schools by their current status rather than try to sort through all that.
_________________ I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
bluedevilaztecfan5
Joined: 16 Mar 2010 Posts: 796 Location: San Diego, CA
Back to top |
|
|
|