| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66900
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63763
Back to top |
|
blaase22
Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Posts: 4163
Location: Paradise
Back to top |
 Posted: 04/01/21 1:21 pm ::: |
Reply  |
|
| They are right, allowing foreign women into the league at 19 but not Americans is such bullshit.
|
|
WNBA 09
Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 12528
Location: Dallas , Texas
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/01/21 2:50 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| blaase22 wrote: |
| They are right, allowing foreign women into the league at 19 but not Americans is such bullshit. |
+1
_________________
3-Time WNBA Champion-3-Time National Champion-4-Time Olympic Champion....And Yes DT "We Got Confeti" lol
|
|
And1
Joined: 19 Feb 2014
Posts: 150
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/01/21 3:33 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Bueckers may be good against her college peers, but in no way, shape or form is she WNBA-ready, so it's a moot issue.
|
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63763
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/01/21 3:40 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| And1 wrote: |
| Bueckers may be good against her college peers, but in no way, shape or form is she WNBA-ready, so it's a moot issue. |
I’m very skeptical that she’d be ready enough to have an impact at the WNBA level, especially as a starter. But Napheesa Collier’s trainer/fiancé seems to feel differently.
_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
|
|
Richyyy
Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 24349
Location: London
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/01/21 3:50 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| And1 wrote: |
| Bueckers may be good against her college peers, but in no way, shape or form is she WNBA-ready, so it's a moot issue. |
She's one of the best players in college basketball. Both the raw stats and the number of awards she's either won or been shortlisted for supports that. Meanwhile, in two weeks teams are about to draft 36 players, at least a dozen or so of which will make rosters. Most of them will be college players who weren't as good as Bueckers this year. Several will get a decent amount of minutes in the WNBA this year.
She might not be ready to be an absolute superstar at the pro level, but come on. She'd at least be decent, even right now. |
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11140
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/01/21 4:05 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Richyyy wrote: |
| And1 wrote: |
| Bueckers may be good against her college peers, but in no way, shape or form is she WNBA-ready, so it's a moot issue. |
She's one of the best players in college basketball. Both the raw stats and the number of awards she's either won or been shortlisted for supports that. Meanwhile, in two weeks teams are about to draft 36 players, at least a dozen or so of which will make rosters. Most of them will be college players who weren't as good as Bueckers this year. Several will get a decent amount of minutes in the WNBA this year.
She might not be ready to be an absolute superstar at the pro level, but come on. She'd at least be decent, even right now. |
Agreed ...
So here's a question: Would it make more sense to have women's basketball fans and media focus on either the WNBA or college basketball? Would it be better to have one healthier aspect of the game as opposed to two that fragment the audience?
I don't think so, but consider major league baseball. If college baseball were equally popular, what would that mean for MLB?
A corollary: Does a player like Bueckers do more for the sport overall playing in college or playing in the WNBA?
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
myrtle
Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32335
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/01/21 6:44 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| blaase22 wrote: |
| They are right, allowing foreign women into the league at 19 but not Americans is such bullshit. |
I agree. And as I said elsewhere, one way to do it would be to set 21 as the age for both. I think it's important for players to get at least two years of college under their belts. Have you noticed the difference in interviews with the women vs interviews with men. Obviously not all, but I think the women sound much more coherent and intelligent. Some of the guys can barely form a real sentence. Maybe it has nothing to do with going to college and (usually) completing a degree there, but I'm guessing it does.
|
|
shontay33
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 471
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/01/21 6:46 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| And1 wrote: |
| Bueckers may be good against her college peers, but in no way, shape or form is she WNBA-ready, so it's a moot issue. |
What makes her not ready for the WNBA? If a 19 year old from Russia or China can get drafted and brought into training camp, why can’t she? I’m sure that if given the chance, she would definitely be in training camp with the Senior national team for USAB. She has already proven herself at the college level and is very marketable due to her following. What more does she need? I’m sure with her IQ and ability, she can hold her own.
|
|
Stormeo
Joined: 14 Jul 2019
Posts: 4701
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/01/21 6:56 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Richyyy wrote: |
| She might not be ready to be an absolute superstar at the pro level, but... She'd at least be decent, even right now. |
I agree with all of this, especially since she now has a full season’s worth of games to show that she’s good. Little to no drop-off – she’s for real.
If she wanted to make money, she (and other good young players ineligible to get drafted into the W) could simply drop out of school & start playing overseas up until she gets eligible for the Draft. That would probably be a better route for a W-ready player like her to continue her b-ball development in rather than stay in college, even at a program like UConn’s. Would people forget about her in time? Perhaps not if she signs an endorsement deal or two upon dropping out of school & turning pro, and rides it out until she’s Draft-eligible. Who knows. It hasn’t been done before on the women’s side with such an elite & popular player.
And should the W drop its overall age limit to what the NBA’s is? I say sure, why not. With the transfer portal, things have now more than ever before become a total cesspool with regards to the transfer market for coaches. Total shitshow anyway, so what’s more chaos at this point? Bueckers & others could wait for the NCAA to be dramatically reformed and hope they’re some of the first ones to get paid as high-marketability student-athletes, but that could certainly take a while the way that change often only inches along. If Bueckers herself continues to talk about how she wishes she had the choice to (whether or not she’d actually do it is beside the point), eventually the W might have to address it sooner or later. I wish they had the ability to do it now.
| blaase22 wrote: |
| allowing foreign women into the league at 19 but not Americans is such bullshit. |
And I agree with this as well. IMO the W needs to stop helping NCAA wbb out with keeping younger student-athletes out of Draft eligibility and keeping them in the NCAA by default (generally speaking) – especially now that the NCAA is on the brink of a complete overhaul.
|
|
CamrnCrz1974
Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 18371
Location: Phoenix
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/01/21 7:36 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Shades wrote: |
| And1 wrote: |
| Bueckers may be good against her college peers, but in no way, shape or form is she WNBA-ready, so it's a moot issue. |
I’m very skeptical that she’d be ready enough to have an impact at the WNBA level, especially as a starter. But Napheesa Collier’s trainer/fiancé seems to feel differently. |
And you were just as skeptical about and critical of Collier ... and then Napheesa won WNBA ROY.
|
|
Richyyy
Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 24349
Location: London
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/01/21 7:39 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
But does it really hurt the WNBA to keep these players out until they're 21/22? They get free development, they get all the publicity and profile-building for people like Bueckers while they're in college, and then they get to bring them into the league when some of the stars already have this cult following behind them. And remember, Bueckers is the very rare case of superstardom as a freshman. Some of the others might've been building something in their first year, but most take two or three at least to really draw attention.
We can talk about 'fairness' all we want - and I've been saying for years that the difference in rules for Americans and non-Americans was a nonsense - but unless someone challenges it in court, these are collectively bargained rules. That means changing them either has to make sense for both sides, or be wanted enough by one side for them to really push for it. Do the players really want to open up their league for people to come in at a younger age (when the new entries could take their jobs, and have opportunities that they didn't have)? Do the League want to let players in at a younger age, reducing the benefits mentioned above, forcing teams to draft with less information on player quality and carry players on their rosters for more years of early development?
I'd be surprised to see any particularly wholesale changes. |
|
Milks26
Joined: 25 Mar 2021
Posts: 830
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/01/21 8:09 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
19 year old foreigners usually start playing professional basketball from 16 - against women. That's the difference.
But, honestly this discussion is mote if were stuck with 12 leagues. Where are they going to go? It's very rare a great foreign bb player comes on the scene when we have a #1 prospect out of high school every year.
Expand the league by two teams or even simpler allow 13-15 players on the roster of 12 existing teams. How many good with potential to be great players don't make a roster every year because were stuck with 12 teams - 12 player roster. That's more important than one and done kids.
_________________
~College WBB & the "W' need other tv networks covering the important stuff...Espn is beyond tired~
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66900
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/01/21 8:48 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Milks26 wrote: |
| 19 year old foreigners usually start playing professional basketball from 16 - against women. That's the difference. |
Also those players are generally not very effective at 19, even the good ones. Cambage was a part time starter who scored 11 ppg. LoJack shot 37% (31% from three) and was repeatedly exposed on defense. That's the high end of what teens do in the W. More commonly they look like JiSu Park.
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
Milks26
Joined: 25 Mar 2021
Posts: 830
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/01/21 9:14 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| pilight wrote: |
| Milks26 wrote: |
| 19 year old foreigners usually start playing professional basketball from 16 - against women. That's the difference. |
Also those players are generally not very effective at 19, even the good ones. Cambage was a part time starter who scored 11 ppg. LoJack shot 37% (31% from three) and was repeatedly exposed on defense. That's the high end of what teens do in the W. More commonly they look like JiSu Park. |
Yep! I saw a few games of Cambage as a rookie.
There's a reason why this one and done crap is surfacing for women's basketball
_________________
~College WBB & the "W' need other tv networks covering the important stuff...Espn is beyond tired~
|
|
willtalk
Joined: 13 Apr 2012
Posts: 1093
Location: NorCal
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/01/21 10:34 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
While the womens basketball players in high school are certainly better athletically than their couner parts over seas as a whole. Technically and in respect to learning other aspects of the game they are usually not ready to transition their talents to a higher level. They are stars in high school who basically use their superior athletic ability to dominate there competition. They still have to learn how to integrate their indigidual skills into the team whole. As Geno said, players know how, they just need t learn when.
Beuckers. would seem to be the exception. She knows the game very well and it might be to her advantage to go directly to the Pro's. Perhaps with her first season spent over seas.
_________________
No one one is ever as good as their best game, nor as bad as their worst.
|
|
WfanFrJmp
Joined: 24 May 2016
Posts: 1423
Back to top |
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63763
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/03/21 7:41 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Did she ever graduate?
_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
|
|
WfanFrJmp
Joined: 24 May 2016
Posts: 1423
Back to top |
|
ucbart
Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 2815
Location: New York
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/08/21 7:06 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| And1 wrote: |
| Bueckers may be good against her college peers, but in no way, shape or form is she WNBA-ready, so it's a moot issue. |
It's not a moot issue. Paige would be the #1 pick in the draft and she would be used as an investment in the future, like men's players are, or as a bargaining chip for a team that wants to trade the pick to win now.
The top 3 prospects in WCBB are Bueckers, Clark, and Boston and they would be the top 3 picks in this draft. Are any of them ready to be elite yet? No. Paige has to get stronger, Clark needs improvements on D, and Boston has to get in shape. What they all have though, is potential, and there is zero chance, if eligible to go in the 2021 draft, that they wouldn't be the top 3 picks.
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11140
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/21 8:58 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| ucbart wrote: |
| And1 wrote: |
| Bueckers may be good against her college peers, but in no way, shape or form is she WNBA-ready, so it's a moot issue. |
It's not a moot issue. Paige would be the #1 pick in the draft and she would be used as an investment in the future, like men's players are, or as a bargaining chip for a team that wants to trade the pick to win now.
The top 3 prospects in WCBB are Bueckers, Clark, and Boston and they would be the top 3 picks in this draft. Are any of them ready to be elite yet? No. Paige has to get stronger, Clark needs improvements on D, and Boston has to get in shape. What they all have though, is potential, and there is zero chance, if eligible to go in the 2021 draft, that they wouldn't be the top 3 picks. |
X_____________
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
Randy
Joined: 08 Oct 2011
Posts: 10911
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/21 10:05 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| If the NCAA loses the lawsuit about paying players, maybe we could see star players being offered more to stay in school than the WNBA pays. Not sure where that stands though.
|
|
PUmatty
Joined: 10 Nov 2004
Posts: 16358
Location: Chicago
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/21 11:40 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| ucbart wrote: |
| And1 wrote: |
| Bueckers may be good against her college peers, but in no way, shape or form is she WNBA-ready, so it's a moot issue. |
It's not a moot issue. Paige would be the #1 pick in the draft and she would be used as an investment in the future, like men's players are, or as a bargaining chip for a team that wants to trade the pick to win now.
The top 3 prospects in WCBB are Bueckers, Clark, and Boston and they would be the top 3 picks in this draft. Are any of them ready to be elite yet? No. Paige has to get stronger, Clark needs improvements on D, and Boston has to get in shape. What they all have though, is potential, and there is zero chance, if eligible to go in the 2021 draft, that they wouldn't be the top 3 picks. |
Exactly this.
|
|
Richyyy
Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 24349
Location: London
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/21 11:57 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Watching the NCAA tournament, I think I got up close to double-digits in counting players who would probably be the #1 pick if they were magically made eligible for this year's draft. |
|
|
|
