| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jap
Joined: 01 Apr 2007
Posts: 7924
Back to top |
 Posted: 03/16/24 7:48 pm ::: |
Reply  |
|
| Rock Hard wrote: |
| PUmatty wrote: |
| ClayK wrote: |
Rickea Jackson: A lot of people who should know like her a lot better than I do. So OK, she's a future starter and maybe a future third option on a really good team.
Aaliyah Edwards: Is an athletic 6-3 inside player whose numbers are fine. But to be a rebuilding piece, you need to become an above-average starter in the WNBA. She seems to me to be a rotation player on a good team, and a second-division starter. And it's hard to be really good in this league if you don't have at least a solid mid-range jumper.
Angel Reese: Big numbers against a weak schedule, so that's hard to judge. Like Edwards, no game outside the paint up to this point. And like Edwards, seems to me to be a rotation player on a good team and a second-division starter.
To rebuild, you need stars, not role players, and of this trio, it would appear Jackson is the only one with the potential to be a star. |
To rebuild for real success, you need No. 1 picks. Occasionally a No. 2 can do it. But that's it. Everything else is just how you fill in teams and the league around No. 1 picks. |
Let's not forget about using free agency to build a successful team. New York would not be near the top of the league without the gems they acquired with free agency. Chicago won their only championship with a major free agency gem, Candace Parker. |
There is also the well known fact that the athletic drafting systems employed by professional sports teams are not perfect. Saying one needs to draft a #1 or a #2 to build a team is simply not universally true. There are drafts where they may be several blue-chip players, just as there are drafts where there may be none whatsoever. Using an example from NFL football (my favorite sport!), the LA Rams (my favorite NFL team) drafted a wide receiver named Puka Nacua (Samoan background), as the very last pick in the fifth round of the 2023 NFL draft. This young kid went on to have the greatest season of any NFL rookie wide receiver in NFL history. Being the final pick of the fifth round means that Puka was chosen after 170 draftees who preceded him. In other words, all 32 NFL teams, including the LA Rams who selected Puka greatly underestimated just how great this young kid would become and so soon. Drafting systems are not perfect, and sometimes the best blue chip draftees may be chosen much later than the overall #1 or #2 selections.
As far as team building is concerned, one cannot overlook role players. The vast majority of players in any team sport are role players. You cannot have a team consisting totally of superstars as it is economically unsustainable. Sometimes the critical missing piece in a team is a critical role player, and that role player does not necessarily have to be a superstar - just someone who fulfills their team time very well. For example, a solid point guard who can get entry passes to post players or perimeter players with high accuracy & timing can be the critical difference between a playoff-caliber contender and a championship team.
_________________
Regards,
J A P
Last edited by jap on 03/16/24 7:58 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11150
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/17/24 10:53 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| The draft history of the WNBA, and the NBA, supports the contention that top picks are crucial. Occasionally you get lucky later in the draft, but just look at the drafts in the past five years. The outcomes speak for themselves ...
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
PUmatty
Joined: 10 Nov 2004
Posts: 16359
Location: Chicago
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/17/24 12:01 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| jap wrote: |
| Rock Hard wrote: |
| PUmatty wrote: |
| ClayK wrote: |
Rickea Jackson: A lot of people who should know like her a lot better than I do. So OK, she's a future starter and maybe a future third option on a really good team.
Aaliyah Edwards: Is an athletic 6-3 inside player whose numbers are fine. But to be a rebuilding piece, you need to become an above-average starter in the WNBA. She seems to me to be a rotation player on a good team, and a second-division starter. And it's hard to be really good in this league if you don't have at least a solid mid-range jumper.
Angel Reese: Big numbers against a weak schedule, so that's hard to judge. Like Edwards, no game outside the paint up to this point. And like Edwards, seems to me to be a rotation player on a good team and a second-division starter.
To rebuild, you need stars, not role players, and of this trio, it would appear Jackson is the only one with the potential to be a star. |
To rebuild for real success, you need No. 1 picks. Occasionally a No. 2 can do it. But that's it. Everything else is just how you fill in teams and the league around No. 1 picks. |
Let's not forget about using free agency to build a successful team. New York would not be near the top of the league without the gems they acquired with free agency. Chicago won their only championship with a major free agency gem, Candace Parker. |
There is also the well known fact that the athletic drafting systems employed by professional sports teams are not perfect. Saying one needs to draft a #1 or a #2 to build a team is simply not universally true. There are drafts where they may be several blue-chip players, just as there are drafts where there may be none whatsoever. Using an example from NFL football (my favorite sport!), the LA Rams (my favorite NFL team) drafted a wide receiver named Puka Nacua (Samoan background), as the very last pick in the fifth round of the 2023 NFL draft. This young kid went on to have the greatest season of any NFL rookie wide receiver in NFL history. Being the final pick of the fifth round means that Puka was chosen after 170 draftees who preceded him. In other words, all 32 NFL teams, including the LA Rams who selected Puka greatly underestimated just how great this young kid would become and so soon. Drafting systems are not perfect, and sometimes the best blue chip draftees may be chosen much later than the overall #1 or #2 selections.
As far as team building is concerned, one cannot overlook role players. The vast majority of players in any team sport are role players. You cannot have a team consisting totally of superstars as it is economically unsustainable. Sometimes the critical missing piece in a team is a critical role player, and that role player does not necessarily have to be a superstar - just someone who fulfills their team time very well. For example, a solid point guard who can get entry passes to post players or perimeter players with high accuracy & timing can be the critical difference between a playoff-caliber contender and a championship team. |
When it comes to building a team, the NFL could not be more different that the WNBA.
|
|
jap
Joined: 01 Apr 2007
Posts: 7924
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/17/24 5:16 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| PUmatty wrote: |
| jap wrote: |
| Rock Hard wrote: |
| PUmatty wrote: |
| ClayK wrote: |
Rickea Jackson: A lot of people who should know like her a lot better than I do. So OK, she's a future starter and maybe a future third option on a really good team.
Aaliyah Edwards: Is an athletic 6-3 inside player whose numbers are fine. But to be a rebuilding piece, you need to become an above-average starter in the WNBA. She seems to me to be a rotation player on a good team, and a second-division starter. And it's hard to be really good in this league if you don't have at least a solid mid-range jumper.
Angel Reese: Big numbers against a weak schedule, so that's hard to judge. Like Edwards, no game outside the paint up to this point. And like Edwards, seems to me to be a rotation player on a good team and a second-division starter.
To rebuild, you need stars, not role players, and of this trio, it would appear Jackson is the only one with the potential to be a star. |
To rebuild for real success, you need No. 1 picks. Occasionally a No. 2 can do it. But that's it. Everything else is just how you fill in teams and the league around No. 1 picks. |
Let's not forget about using free agency to build a successful team. New York would not be near the top of the league without the gems they acquired with free agency. Chicago won their only championship with a major free agency gem, Candace Parker. |
There is also the well known fact that the athletic drafting systems employed by professional sports teams are not perfect. Saying one needs to draft a #1 or a #2 to build a team is simply not universally true. There are drafts where they may be several blue-chip players, just as there are drafts where there may be none whatsoever. Using an example from NFL football (my favorite sport!), the LA Rams (my favorite NFL team) drafted a wide receiver named Puka Nacua (Samoan background), as the very last pick in the fifth round of the 2023 NFL draft. This young kid went on to have the greatest season of any NFL rookie wide receiver in NFL history. Being the final pick of the fifth round means that Puka was chosen after 170 draftees who preceded him. In other words, all 32 NFL teams, including the LA Rams who selected Puka greatly underestimated just how great this young kid would become and so soon. Drafting systems are not perfect, and sometimes the best blue chip draftees may be chosen much later than the overall #1 or #2 selections.
As far as team building is concerned, one cannot overlook role players. The vast majority of players in any team sport are role players. You cannot have a team consisting totally of superstars as it is economically unsustainable. Sometimes the critical missing piece in a team is a critical role player, and that role player does not necessarily have to be a superstar - just someone who fulfills their team time very well. For example, a solid point guard who can get entry passes to post players or perimeter players with high accuracy & timing can be the critical difference between a playoff-caliber contender and a championship team. |
When it comes to building a team, the NFL could not be more different that the WNBA. |
Your statement does not invalidate the simple point I was making: that blue chip.players can emerge from outside the so-called top prospects, and it happens more often than one may suspect.
:
_________________
Regards,
J A P
|
|
NYSports56
Joined: 03 Jul 2018
Posts: 1126
Location: New Jersey, USA
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/17/24 11:36 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
Rickea Jackson: A lot of people who should know like her a lot better than I do. So OK, she's a future starter and maybe a future third option on a really good team.
Aaliyah Edwards: Is an athletic 6-3 inside player whose numbers are fine. But to be a rebuilding piece, you need to become an above-average starter in the WNBA. She seems to me to be a rotation player on a good team, and a second-division starter. And it's hard to be really good in this league if you don't have at least a solid mid-range jumper.
Angel Reese: Big numbers against a weak schedule, so that's hard to judge. Like Edwards, no game outside the paint up to this point. And like Edwards, seems to me to be a rotation player on a good team and a second-division starter.
To rebuild, you need stars, not role players, and of this trio, it would appear Jackson is the only one with the potential to be a star. |
You are underestimating Aaliyah Edwards slightly because her mid range game is just fine. She's not Angel Reese at all. She's especially good from the top of the key--she'll punish you for sagging on her when she's there. That said, your overall estimate is pretty fair; she's good enough to start certain places, good enough to be a valuable rotation player elsewhere. Maybe not much of a ceiling, but a very high floor.
Except for her nose, Aaliyah has been a pillar of durability on a team made of fragile glass. She plays hard all the time. Whoever drafts her is going to love her.
|
|
hangtyme24
Joined: 21 May 2006
Posts: 2443
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/18/24 12:23 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| NYSports56 wrote: |
| ClayK wrote: |
Rickea Jackson: A lot of people who should know like her a lot better than I do. So OK, she's a future starter and maybe a future third option on a really good team.
Aaliyah Edwards: Is an athletic 6-3 inside player whose numbers are fine. But to be a rebuilding piece, you need to become an above-average starter in the WNBA. She seems to me to be a rotation player on a good team, and a second-division starter. And it's hard to be really good in this league if you don't have at least a solid mid-range jumper.
Angel Reese: Big numbers against a weak schedule, so that's hard to judge. Like Edwards, no game outside the paint up to this point. And like Edwards, seems to me to be a rotation player on a good team and a second-division starter.
To rebuild, you need stars, not role players, and of this trio, it would appear Jackson is the only one with the potential to be a star. |
You are underestimating Aaliyah Edwards slightly because her mid range game is just fine. She's not Angel Reese at all. She's especially good from the top of the key--she'll punish you for sagging on her when she's there. That said, your overall estimate is pretty fair; she's good enough to start certain places, good enough to be a valuable rotation player elsewhere. Maybe not much of a ceiling, but a very high floor.
Except for her nose, Aaliyah has been a pillar of durability on a team made of fragile glass. She plays hard all the time. Whoever drafts her is going to love her. |
You beat me to it (regarding Edwards). Edwards has a nice mid range jumper like stated above. I actually think she will be a solid pro. Maybe not an all-star but a solid role player. I also wouldn't be surprised if she was a better player at the professional level. She already has experience playing for Canada and she is a legit 6'3 banger who doesn't take plays off. I think she would be a good fit in Washington, Minnesota, Chicago and LA. Anyone who needs a stretch 4 honestly lol
_________________
HERE 2 STAY!
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11150
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/18/24 9:06 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| I confess to not having seen Edwards as much as the others. If she can shoot from the top of the key, she could be a solid or better WNBA player.
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
RavenDog
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 6878
Location: Home
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/18/24 12:34 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
| I confess to not having seen Edwards as much as the others. If she can shoot from the top of the key, she could be a solid or better WNBA player. |
A confession requires communion, so your penance is to quit shooting with an empty gun.
You've maligned several players in different ways this year, not only the aforementioned likely 4th, 5th and 6th sixth picks in the Draft. Do you actually watch many of the east coast games and the SEC?
For instance, stating that a player cannot shoot. If you are not familiar with her teams composition and play, how do you know this for sure. Amoore is a very good shooter, unfortunately she has to throw up shots she would normally not take due to her team's make up and supporting cast. Many are last second shots at the end of periods or possessions. These circumstances sometimes give people who mostly rely on statistics an unclear view. Again, are you familiar with her team and watch most of her games?
What do coaches always say that wins basketball games...defense and rebounds. Who does these things better than Reese, Cardoso, and Edwards?
Cardoso and Reese both have personalities and will do best under a strong coach. Stallions need maturity and coaching leadership. Edwards can play for any coach/team and fit in well with all the players. Simply a coach's joy and someone to be around.
|
|
WNBA 09
Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 12537
Location: Dallas , Texas
Back to top |
|
NYSports56
Joined: 03 Jul 2018
Posts: 1126
Location: New Jersey, USA
Back to top |
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11150
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/20/24 9:21 am ::: |
Reply |
|
>You've maligned several players in different ways this year, not only the aforementioned likely 4th, 5th and 6th sixth picks in the Draft. Do you actually watch many of the east coast games and the SEC?
For instance, stating that a player cannot shoot. If you are not familiar with her teams composition and play, how do you know this for sure. Amoore is a very good shooter, unfortunately she has to throw up shots she would normally not take due to her team's make up and supporting cast. Many are last second shots at the end of periods or possessions. These circumstances sometimes give people who mostly rely on statistics an unclear view. Again, are you familiar with her team and watch most of her games?
What do coaches always say that wins basketball games...defense and rebounds. Who does these things better than Reese, Cardoso, and Edwards?
------------
"Malign" might be too strong a word, but I am definitely not a cheerleader. Am I too negative about players' chances to succeed in the pros? I don't think so, though obviously I've been wrong about players.
In general, though, two statistics are tremendous predictors of future success, pretty much regardless of level: 3-point percentage and A/TO.
Certainly 3-pt. percentage is not that valuable for post players, but overall shooting and free-throw percentage are very helpful.
Now, do I see a lot of East Coast games on TV? No. Fair point. But in general (again), the numbers don't lie. Style of play, and role on a team can have impacts, to be sure, but the bottom line is you have to make shots and contribute to the offense.
Coaches may say that defense and rebounding win games, but they determine who wins games by who has the most points, not the most rebounds. And scoring is by far the most valuable skill in the women's game. You can find athletes who can defend; you can find tall, strong kids who can rebound; but finding scorers? Much harder.
So at the highest level of the game, a player's value is closely tied to her ability to score. Take Lexie Hull and Haley Jones, two very smart, very skilled players. They struggle to score and do not start. Of course you can have a player who doesn't score in your starting five, but the other four better be able to.
I think Cardoso will be a very good player in the WNBA. If Edwards can hit elbow and baseline jumpers, she should be fine as well. I don't have a high opinion of Angel Reese's game, but it's certainly possible she could be a good to very good WNBA player.
And Georgia Amoore can prove me wrong. We'll find out soon enough.
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
RavenDog
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 6878
Location: Home
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/20/24 3:43 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
>You've maligned several players in different ways this year, not only the aforementioned likely 4th, 5th and 6th sixth picks in the Draft. Do you actually watch many of the east coast games and the SEC?
For instance, stating that a player cannot shoot. If you are not familiar with her teams composition and play, how do you know this for sure. Amoore is a very good shooter, unfortunately she has to throw up shots she would normally not take due to her team's make up and supporting cast. Many are last second shots at the end of periods or possessions. These circumstances sometimes give people who mostly rely on statistics an unclear view. Again, are you familiar with her team and watch most of her games?
What do coaches always say that wins basketball games...defense and rebounds. Who does these things better than Reese, Cardoso, and Edwards?
------------
"Malign" might be too strong a word, but I am definitely not a cheerleader. Am I too negative about players' chances to succeed in the pros? I don't think so, though obviously I've been wrong about players.
In general, though, two statistics are tremendous predictors of future success, pretty much regardless of level: 3-point percentage and A/TO.
Certainly 3-pt. percentage is not that valuable for post players, but overall shooting and free-throw percentage are very helpful.
Now, do I see a lot of East Coast games on TV? No. Fair point. But in general (again), the numbers don't lie. Style of play, and role on a team can have impacts, to be sure, but the bottom line is you have to make shots and contribute to the offense.
Coaches may say that defense and rebounding win games, but they determine who wins games by who has the most points, not the most rebounds. And scoring is by far the most valuable skill in the women's game. You can find athletes who can defend; you can find tall, strong kids who can rebound; but finding scorers? Much harder.
So at the highest level of the game, a player's value is closely tied to her ability to score. Take Lexie Hull and Haley Jones, two very smart, very skilled players. They struggle to score and do not start. Of course you can have a player who doesn't score in your starting five, but the other four better be able to.
I think Cardoso will be a very good player in the WNBA. If Edwards can hit elbow and baseline jumpers, she should be fine as well. I don't have a high opinion of Angel Reese's game, but it's certainly possible she could be a good to very good WNBA player.
And Georgia Amoore can prove me wrong. We'll find out soon enough. |
You need both, scoring and defense/rebounds to be a winner.
As for Amoore, her shooting ability is very good. Will she make a good WNBA PG, I am not sure either.
I think Reese will become a star player. She's tough, big, long, strong, can bring the ball up, she played PG at one point in her rise to fame. She can bang and is not afraid to do it. She bull rushes like A'ja which they currently allow. She's a very good passer and gets her team involved. She's a good free throw shooter. She's awkward and long around the rim and it's been effective. She's an All American and won the NCAA National Championship. Her only need is for a midrange and longer shot which she's working on. As I mentioned before, Mulkey told her no shooting away from the basket, she's needed on the boards and defense. She has enough of shooters around her for scoring. Reese will develop a midrange shot, she's a fighter not a quiter. And she hates to lose. She could play on any team in the WNBA.
Her behavior, like Cardoso is something she needs to work on. That's why I said she will do best under a strong coach. However, people don't usually completely change but they can improve.
JMO
|
|
|
|
