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

And The 10th Pick of the 2005 WNBA Draft Goes to...

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



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 9633
Location: Tiburon, CA


Back to top
PostPosted: 12/21/04 5:30 pm    ::: And The 10th Pick of the 2005 WNBA Draft Goes to... Reply Reply with quote

The New York Liberty Shocked

http://www.wnba.com/features/countdown_draft_2005.html

Someone will have to explain that tiebreaker to me again... Lot of difference between 8th and 10th. Confused


    First Round

    1) Charlotte (16-18 )
    2) Indiana (15-19)
    3) Phoenix (17-17)
    4) San Antonio (9-25)
    5) Houston (13-21)
    6) Washington (17-17)
    7) Detroit (17-17)
    8 ) Connecticut (18-16)
    9) Sacramento (18-16)
    10) New York (18-16)
    11) Minnesota (18-16)
    12) Seattle (20-14)
    13) Los Angeles (25-9)


    Second Round

    1) San Antonio (9-25)
    2) Houston (13-12)
    3) Indiana (15-19)
    4) Charlotte (16-18 )
    5) Phoenix (17-17)
    6) Washington (17-17)
    7) Detroit (17-17)
    8 ) Connecticut (18-16)
    9) Sacramento (18-16)
    10) New York (18-16)
    11) Minnesota (18-16)
    12) Seattle (20-14)
    13) Los Angeles (25-9)

    Third Round

    1) San Antonio (9-25)
    2) Houston (13-21)
    3) Indiana (15-19)
    4) Sacramento from Charlotte (16-18 ) (Frett, 4/23/04)
    5) Phoenix (17-17)
    6) Washington (17-17)
    7) Detroit (17-17)
    Cool Connecticut (18-16)
    9) Sacramento (18-16)
    10) New York (18-16)
    11) Minnesota (18-16)
    12) Seattle (20-14)
    13) Los Angeles (25-9)



_________________
2002 WNBA Virtual GM Overall Winner
2006 WNBA Triple Threat Overall Winner
2007 NBA ESPN Fast Break Overall Winner
p_d_swanson



Joined: 01 Dec 2004
Posts: 9714



Back to top
PostPosted: 12/21/04 6:48 pm    ::: Re: And The 10th Pick of the 2005 WNBA Draft Goes to... Reply Reply with quote

Quote:
Someone will have to explain that tiebreaker to me again...


I believe they use the same procedure as for determining playoff seeding. Four teams tied with 18-16 records; in games played among those four, Minnesota finished 5-3, Sacramento 4-4, New York 4-4 and Connecticut 3-5. The Sun were thus awarded #8 and Minnesota #11, with Sacramento gaining the #9 spot by virtue of a 6-6 record vs. Eastern Conference opponents while the Liberty went 8-6 against the West.


CamrnCrz1974



Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 17184
Location: Phoenix


Back to top
PostPosted: 12/22/04 3:24 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

So Connecticut wins the Eastern Conference and gets the top seed in the playoffs, but then picks ahead of the New York Liberty in the subsequent WNBA draft?


BCBG25



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 20112
Location: Sampa


Back to top
PostPosted: 12/22/04 9:43 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

CamrnCrz1974 wrote:
So Connecticut wins the Eastern Conference and gets the top seed in the playoffs, but then picks ahead of the New York Liberty in the subsequent WNBA draft?


Yes, that's just fucked up.



_________________
Kings of the World!
dtsnms



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 18815



Back to top
PostPosted: 12/22/04 10:34 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

BCBG25 wrote:
CamrnCrz1974 wrote:
So Connecticut wins the Eastern Conference and gets the top seed in the playoffs, but then picks ahead of the New York Liberty in the subsequent WNBA draft?


Yes, that's just fucked up.


It's a wonderful thing!!!


blzntr33s



Joined: 20 Nov 2004
Posts: 364



Back to top
PostPosted: 12/22/04 3:07 pm    ::: Re: And The 10th Pick of the 2005 WNBA Draft Goes to... Reply Reply with quote

Hmm... Looks like LA gets the short end of the stick. Can't say I'm disappointed. No offense Sparks fans, but.... you know. LOL


KeiraNY



Joined: 19 Nov 2004
Posts: 12683
Location: New York, NY


Back to top
PostPosted: 12/22/04 3:42 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Yes it is pretty fvcked up!! When the Libs won the division we still picked last, only ahead of LA...I think we should be picking at LEAST 8...eh, whatever!! Whoever we pick won't pass the "chemistry" test and will be dumped in training camp...



BCBG25 wrote:
CamrnCrz1974 wrote:
So Connecticut wins the Eastern Conference and gets the top seed in the playoffs, but then picks ahead of the New York Liberty in the subsequent WNBA draft?


Yes, that's just fucked up.


4ever_bball_fan



Joined: 20 Dec 2004
Posts: 6125
Location: Houston


Back to top
PostPosted: 12/22/04 3:58 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

KeiraNY wrote:
"Whoever we pick won't pass the "chemistry" test and will be dumped in training camp... "

I couldn't agree more, but with the mid-level veterans becoming more difficult to keep due to salary cap issues, rookies will have a chance at making a team just because they are less expensive.

I remember back in the day in Houston...whomever was drafted by the Comets may as well not even pack their bags to come take the physical...there was no room in the inn for a non-tried player. The CBA has actually hurt the "non-star" four to five year player, in my opinion. You won't see teams staying together for more than two years unless there are several rookies that come in together and continue on the same team. Look at the Shock...you have four players (Nolan, Riley, Cash and Ford) who are within three years of each other. Two will be core players and the others will be left out of the top money because there just isn't enough with the salary structure and hard cap to keep them all together for very long.

Anyone else have ideas on this???


dtsnms



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 18815



Back to top
PostPosted: 12/22/04 4:24 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

4ever_bball_fan wrote:
KeiraNY wrote:
"The CBA has actually hurt the "non-star" four to five year player, in my opinion. You won't see teams staying together for more than two years unless there are several rookies that come in together and continue on the same team. .

Anyone else have ideas on this???


Dead on! Last year Seattle cut both Rita Williams and Stacy Clinesmith, who were fighting with Greco for the last spot because they made more money in part. Stacy even applied to the league for exemption because she had something like 2 games on a roster and DNP in both but it counted against her to make her a four year player.


KeiraNY



Joined: 19 Nov 2004
Posts: 12683
Location: New York, NY


Back to top
PostPosted: 12/22/04 5:44 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Who's making big money on the Libs?? I know VJ is, Baranova was thrown a good chunk of change and so did the Waffle. Tari's up there. How about Becky & C-Rob?? The rest are still cheap, but we have a lot of people that are making good money.

Silly me, they'll be throwing Tari's salary out the window come January...how stupid of me to forget!




4ever_bball_fan wrote:
KeiraNY wrote:
"Whoever we pick won't pass the "chemistry" test and will be dumped in training camp... "

I couldn't agree more, but with the mid-level veterans becoming more difficult to keep due to salary cap issues, rookies will have a chance at making a team just because they are less expensive.

I remember back in the day in Houston...whomever was drafted by the Comets may as well not even pack their bags to come take the physical...there was no room in the inn for a non-tried player. The CBA has actually hurt the "non-star" four to five year player, in my opinion. You won't see teams staying together for more than two years unless there are several rookies that come in together and continue on the same team. Look at the Shock...you have four players (Nolan, Riley, Cash and Ford) who are within three years of each other. Two will be core players and the others will be left out of the top money because there just isn't enough with the salary structure and hard cap to keep them all together for very long.

Anyone else have ideas on this???


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 57581
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 12/22/04 6:32 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

4ever_bball_fan wrote:

I remember back in the day in Houston...whomever was drafted by the Comets may as well not even pack their bags to come take the physical...there was no room in the inn for a non-tried player.



1997: Wanda Guyton, Janeth Arcain, Tina Thompson, and Tammy Jackson all made the team.

1998: Polina Tzekova, Amaya Valdemoro, and Monica Lamb made the team.

1999: Sonja Henning, Kara Wolters, and Jennifer Rizzotti all made the team.

2000: Elena Chakirova made the team.

2001: Amanda Lassiter and Tynesha Lewis made the team.

2002: Michelle Snow made the team.

The last two drafts have been busts, but that's not what you meant by "back in the day".



_________________
Make lots of noise
Kiss lots of boys
Or kiss lots of girls
If that's something you're into
When the straight and narrow
Gets a little too straight
Roll up a joint, or don't
Just follow your arrow
Wherever it points, yeah
Follow your arrow
Wherever it points
4ever_bball_fan



Joined: 20 Dec 2004
Posts: 6125
Location: Houston


Back to top
PostPosted: 12/23/04 10:04 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Pilight, I think you just made my point for me...

1997: Guyton, Arcain and Jackson while they were "drafted", everyone was drafted that year. These three players were already well known entities in women's basketball, not untried players.

1998: again, either international players or known quantities...and boy do I miss Lamb.

1999: Henning came out of college in '91, Wolters in '97 and Rizzo in '96...again, not draft picks straight out of college. And you well know that it is a huge blot on the history of the Houston Comets that Rizzo averaged less than 15 minutes a game the two years she was there. At least she has two rings to show for putting up with VC.

2000: Elena Chakirova was the #16 pick in the first round by the Comets and had played in Russia, in case anyone is scratching their head in bewilderment about who the heck that is. One of those big Russian gals with a great 15' jumper and that is as close as she wanted to get to the basket.

2001: Finally two true rookies out of college. Lassiter gets the chance of a lifetime because Swoopes tears her ACL. Tiger sits the bench for two years with her minutes reducing to less than 10. I loves some #20 and cried when I heard she was cut.

2002: And then there's Snow. Will she ever live up to her potential? What is the deal with her? Could it be that the most difficult player she has to face in practice is Number 00?

2003 saw the likes of Allison Curtin, Lori Nero, Constance Jinks and Oksana Rakhmatulina and 2004 saw nothing in round one of the arguably best draft class in memory, Lindsay Taylor in Rd 2 and Stacey Stephens in round 3.

Which brings us to the number 5 pick in 2005...which young guard will be the next to enter the revolving door in Cometsland?


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 57581
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 12/23/04 10:39 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

You mean your point wasn't...

Quote:
I remember back in the day in Houston...whomever was drafted by the Comets may as well not even pack their bags to come take the physical



Whomever was drafted by The Comets nearly always made the roster until the last two years, which isn't "back in the day".

I've been very critical of Van's drafting. Chakirova and the Z-woman still kill me. I was too excited in 2000 when Helen Darling somehow fell to our pick, especially considering how badly we needed a PG, and it was the choice of Chakirova that got me on the "Van must go" bandwagon. The problem isn't that he drafted bad players, it's that he drafted old players.



_________________
Make lots of noise
Kiss lots of boys
Or kiss lots of girls
If that's something you're into
When the straight and narrow
Gets a little too straight
Roll up a joint, or don't
Just follow your arrow
Wherever it points, yeah
Follow your arrow
Wherever it points
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