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

2017 WNBA Mock Draft
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 71, 72, 73  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » WNBA
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
J-Spoon



Joined: 31 Jan 2009
Posts: 6775



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/14/16 10:13 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

As of right this second

1. SA
2. Dallas
3. LA (from Conn for #5 J. Jomes LA also got C. Gray, that seem like a bad trade, I think Conn got a 2nd round pick they waived as well)
4. Was
5. PX
6. Seattle
7. Atl
8. Indy
9. Chi
10. Dallas (from NY for Zahui B.)
11. Dallas (from LA for R. Williams)
12. Minny

13. SA (unless they traded it?)
14. NY (from Dallas as part of Zahu B. trade I believe)

I'm not sure my trades are correct but they're close.

And then just for fun because it is an off night don't take too seriously but I tried

1. SA D. Deshields
2. Dallas A. Coates
3. LA B. Jones
4. Was S. Walker-Kimbrough
5. PX A. Jones
6. Sea K. Plum
7. Atl S. Cooper
8. Indy N. Coffey
9. Chi T. Scaife
10. Dallas N. Davis
11. Dallas L. Romero
12. Minn S. Weise

13. SA J. Jackson
14. NY (from Dallas) M. Epps


Shades



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63711



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/14/16 11:34 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Is DeShields the only one declaring early? It seems to be the trend to declare early. Did you see the juicy list of eligibles I supplied?

AJones will be higher Jones drafted.
Cooper #7? It's Cooper, not Copper. I'm wondering if she'll make the first round. She best have an amazing year.

I'm hoping the Lynx take advantage of Miller's love of the draft and are able to deal their first for Banham. It's been a trend for them to trade their highest pick.

If the Lynx intend to bring back every guard they now have, then I suppose a trade for Banham isn't too realistic.



_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
J-Spoon



Joined: 31 Jan 2009
Posts: 6775



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/16 12:20 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

It is really difficult to predict early entry. Deshields seems like she is a good candidate because she has that pro swagger, and if her experience in Tenn doesn't improve greatly she might simply want to move forward in her career. Now who knows? Maybe she plays amazingly at Tenn and they get to the final four or beyond and her and Mercedes decide to stay for one more year to repeat and/or get over the final hump. I do not know Diamond, so I don't know if this applies, but if being a #1 draft pick is something she may be motivated by this would be the year to do it.

There are always some surprises, do you have a feeling about any other early entries? This draft could use a little more high end talent.

The fact the LA is getting a lottery pick is crazy, I thought for a second of maybe putting N Davis at LA's lottery pick because they could give her time to develop into being a wing, and with Parker, Ogwumike, Toliver and Beard all having strong outside shots, and lavender's mid-range Davis could be used in line ups where her shot wouldn't be a problem and she could even post up from the SF spot with a big on the perimeter.


Shades



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63711



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/16 7:16 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

You don't have to make an argument for DeShields declaring. It's about the only thing people universally agree on. I don't think she's in it for the edumacation. She could be the #1 pick in 2017 just on the hype of her name. In 2018, she'd be lucky to make top 4 unless she turns into a Taurasi.

Russell was #1 out of high school and she seemed like she made some improvement last year that helped Tennessee out in the later stages. She might be worth looking out for.

A lottery pick going to the Sparks is the biggest waste. Remember they had the #5 pick (near lottery pick) a couple years ago, and now her face is on a milk carton. Where is she? This year, Agler supposedly liked his top rookie as much as he could like a rookie but it didn't stop him from eventually cutting her. She ended up in SAN. Can't really blame Agler, because he and PHX have good overseas scouts. They can pick up experienced players already up to speed for the WNBA as free agents. Why waste time and resources on college rookies? I envy pickups like Dabovic, Tolo, Xargay, and Petrovic. The Lynx tried their hand at doing the same this year. Just their luck, they picked somebody who got pregnant.



_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
dtsnms



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 18815



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/16 9:45 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I look at the draft discussion and still have absolutely no problem with the Sun trade with LA.

Jones will be IMO better than any of these picks, and Gray is still an extra guard in Connecticut with Thomas, Williams, Bentley and eventually Banham.


Shades



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63711



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/16 11:11 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

People are going to bag on that CON trade because Agler finally figured out he should maybe play some bench players, and then Gray went off with a couple great games recently. I wouldn't be surprised to see Jones as the starting center next year. They'd be sitting really pretty if they would have somehow kept Williams, and then have Williams and Jones as the 1-2 punch at center. But they couldn't have anticipated Bone acting up like she did (or should they have?) They had Bone, so didn't need Williams, but man this new green coach was sure giddy about the draft. Tuck, Banham, Jones, Weisner (cut after shedding some tears), and eventually adding CWilliams.



_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11102



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/16 11:34 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

At this point, I think its hard to judge the trade because its unclear how good Alex Bentley or Chelsea Gray are going to be and this same could be set up Courtney Williams.

Bentley has had a bad year, and though Gray hasnt done much, shes been more effective than Bentley. Im still not a believer in Courtney Williams, but Jonquel Jones does indeed look like a keeper.

And of course, who knows how the number three pick will pan out. Right now, it doesnt look like its worth all that much but it's really hard to predict at this point. Kelsey Plum could turn out to be a legit WNBA scorer, and could conceivably be available at number three. Then again, neither of those statements could be true.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
Richyyy



Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 24326
Location: London


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/16 11:54 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

dtsnms wrote:
I look at the draft discussion and still have absolutely no problem with the Sun trade with LA.

Jones will be IMO better than any of these picks, and Gray is still an extra guard in Connecticut with Thomas, Williams, Bentley and eventually Banham.

Jones for Gray or Jones for the pick would've been fine; it's the price of Jones for Gray and the pick that always looked like an overpay.

And it's not like it was really Gray/2017 pick for Jones - it was Gray 2017 pick for an extra pick. If they loved Jones that much they could've taken her at 3 or 4 and passed on Tuck or Banham. They paid the expensive price to hedge their bets further by loading up on yet another 2016 rookie.



_________________
Independent WNBA coverage: http://www.wnbalien.com/
zune69



Joined: 27 May 2010
Posts: 8180



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/16 12:22 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Would be funny if Wilson,Mitchell & Deshields all declare for the 2018 wnba draft.


Shades



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63711



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/16 12:44 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

zune69 wrote:
Would be funny if Wilson,Mitchell & Deshields all declare for the 2018 wnba draft.


Why is it funny? That's the draft they're supposed to end up in. No declaration needed. DeShields has the option for 2017.



_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
J-Spoon



Joined: 31 Jan 2009
Posts: 6775



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/16 2:22 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Richyyy wrote:
dtsnms wrote:
I look at the draft discussion and still have absolutely no problem with the Sun trade with LA.

Jones will be IMO better than any of these picks, and Gray is still an extra guard in Connecticut with Thomas, Williams, Bentley and eventually Banham.

Jones for Gray or Jones for the pick would've been fine; it's the price of Jones for Gray and the pick that always looked like an overpay.

And it's not like it was really Gray/2017 pick for Jones - it was Gray 2017 pick for an extra pick. If they loved Jones that much they could've taken her at 3 or 4 and passed on Tuck or Banham. They paid the expensive price to hedge their bets further by loading up on yet another 2016 rookie.


Also (while it is a risk you have to take sometimes) I doubt Conn thought the first round pick in question was going to be a lottery pick, the pick could still turn out to be the #1 pick in this draft.


Richyyy



Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 24326
Location: London


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/16 2:49 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

J-Spoon wrote:
Richyyy wrote:
dtsnms wrote:
I look at the draft discussion and still have absolutely no problem with the Sun trade with LA.

Jones will be IMO better than any of these picks, and Gray is still an extra guard in Connecticut with Thomas, Williams, Bentley and eventually Banham.

Jones for Gray or Jones for the pick would've been fine; it's the price of Jones for Gray and the pick that always looked like an overpay.

And it's not like it was really Gray/2017 pick for Jones - it was Gray 2017 pick for an extra pick. If they loved Jones that much they could've taken her at 3 or 4 and passed on Tuck or Banham. They paid the expensive price to hedge their bets further by loading up on yet another 2016 rookie.


Also (while it is a risk you have to take sometimes) I doubt Conn thought the first round pick in question was going to be a lottery pick, the pick could still turn out to be the #1 pick in this draft.

If they didn't, that was just dumb. They had a new coach, new system, and a bunch of new players - most of them rookies - on a team that had already missed the playoffs for the last three years. That's a situation where at most you can be 'hopeful' of making the playoffs. You certainly can't assume or expect it.



_________________
Independent WNBA coverage: http://www.wnbalien.com/
J-Spoon



Joined: 31 Jan 2009
Posts: 6775



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/16 3:18 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Richyyy wrote:
J-Spoon wrote:
Richyyy wrote:
dtsnms wrote:
I look at the draft discussion and still have absolutely no problem with the Sun trade with LA.

Jones will be IMO better than any of these picks, and Gray is still an extra guard in Connecticut with Thomas, Williams, Bentley and eventually Banham.

Jones for Gray or Jones for the pick would've been fine; it's the price of Jones for Gray and the pick that always looked like an overpay.

And it's not like it was really Gray/2017 pick for Jones - it was Gray 2017 pick for an extra pick. If they loved Jones that much they could've taken her at 3 or 4 and passed on Tuck or Banham. They paid the expensive price to hedge their bets further by loading up on yet another 2016 rookie.


Also (while it is a risk you have to take sometimes) I doubt Conn thought the first round pick in question was going to be a lottery pick, the pick could still turn out to be the #1 pick in this draft.

If they didn't, that was just dumb. They had a new coach, new system, and a bunch of new players - most of them rookies - on a team that had already missed the playoffs for the last three years. That's a situation where at most you can be 'hopeful' of making the playoffs. You certainly can't assume or expect it.


I agree with everything you're saying, which is why I think it was a bad trade, but they may have thought a new coach and Chiney returning to a team with Bone and Bentley and some new young talent (#3 and #4 and J. Jones) that would be enough to take that step forward to the playoffs.

Otherwise trading C. Gray and a future lottery pick for the #6 pick in a draft where you have #3 and #4 sounds really crazy.


Kailapea



Joined: 28 Feb 2006
Posts: 1255
Location: Northridge, CA


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/16 3:48 pm    ::: Re: 2017 WNBA Mock Draft Reply Reply with quote

Shades wrote:
Draftsite.com has a first round up for 2017 WNBA Draft

http://www.draftsite.com/wnba/mock-draft/2017/


)


Didn't LA trade someone for a first round pick?



_________________
Toughness is in the soul and spirit, not in muscles.
zune69



Joined: 27 May 2010
Posts: 8180



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/16 4:09 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Shades wrote:
zune69 wrote:
Would be funny if Wilson,Mitchell & Deshields all declare for the 2018 wnba draft.


Why is it funny? That's the draft they're supposed to end up in. No declaration needed. DeShields has the option for 2017.


Embarassed I meant the 2017 draft.


Shades



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63711



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/16 4:15 pm    ::: Re: 2017 WNBA Mock Draft Reply Reply with quote

Kailapea wrote:


Didn't LA trade someone for a first round pick?


That graphic is old. LAS owns CON's first round pick. Dallas owns NYL's first round pick.



_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
Kailapea



Joined: 28 Feb 2006
Posts: 1255
Location: Northridge, CA


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/16 4:37 pm    ::: Re: 2017 WNBA Mock Draft Reply Reply with quote

Shades wrote:
Kailapea wrote:


Didn't LA trade someone for a first round pick?


That graphic is old. LAS owns CON's first round pick. Dallas owns NYL's first round pick.


Thanks, thought I was losing my mind.



_________________
Toughness is in the soul and spirit, not in muscles.
Nixtreefan



Joined: 14 Nov 2012
Posts: 2539



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/16 5:00 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:
At this point, I think its hard to judge the trade because its unclear how good Alex Bentley or Chelsea Gray are going to be and this same could be set up Courtney Williams.

Bentley has had a bad year, and though Gray hasnt done much, shes been more effective than Bentley. Im still not a believer in Courtney Williams, but Jonquel Jones does indeed look like a keeper.

And of course, who knows how the number three pick will pan out. Right now, it doesnt look like its worth all that much but it's really hard to predict at this point. Kelsey Plum could turn out to be a legit WNBA scorer, and could conceivably be available at number three. Then again, neither of those statements could be true.


I would be surprised if she became a scorer as I think they are smart enough to take her left hand away Wink Plus she would always give up more points than she could ever score.


BelloFratello



Joined: 04 May 2016
Posts: 67



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/16 5:41 pm    ::: Olivia poupa Reply Reply with quote

Bonjour everybody! I have a question about international draft eligibility. With this being a weak NCAA draft class, I'm wondering about foreign players who may be eligible for this upcoming draft, namely I am inquiring about Olivia poupa from France.

I'm rewatching the Australia vs. France game from the Olympics and she tore Australia's defense up. I'm thinking even in a draft class full of guards that her speed and international experience could get her into the first round or at the very least some draft attention from a number of teams. That is, if she is even eligible. She will turn 23 after the draft on April 30th of next year.

So basically I'm just wondering what the draft eligibility rules are for foreign players. And what makes some players who have been picked in the past ineligible (Yacoubou, Elina Babkina...umm...others?).

Also if anyone has any names of international players who should be looked at for 2017 either in the draft or as free agents that would be sensational!



_________________
Petit a petit, l'oiseau fait son nid
Richyyy



Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 24326
Location: London


Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/16 5:46 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

If you turn 20 in the year of the draft, and you're not part of the NCAA system (and never have been, and have no established plans to join it), then you're eligible for that draft. Epoupa went undrafted when she was eligible a couple of years ago (which didn't make much sense to me at the time), and is therefore an unrestricted free agent in WNBA terms.

The screw-ups in the past were largely due to taking people who were too old to be eligible, with Yacoubou the most egregious example.



_________________
Independent WNBA coverage: http://www.wnbalien.com/
Shades



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63711



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/16 5:53 pm    ::: Re: Olivia poupa Reply Reply with quote

BelloFratello wrote:

Also if anyone has any names of international players who should be looked at for 2017 either in the draft or as free agents that would be sensational!


I've been hearing bella things about poupa. Wink



_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
BelloFratello



Joined: 04 May 2016
Posts: 67



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/16 6:07 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Ahhhh I see. So it seems with age being the main factor, it would be hard to scout out young foreign players, just because they tend to develop later in overseas leagues, unless it is an obvious talent like Lauren Jackson and Elizabeth Cambage. It makes sense why you see more foreigners coming over later in their career as free agents and a lot of drafted foreign players never even come over.

By the way, it's an honor to have a question answered by you! Thanks Richyyy



_________________
Petit a petit, l'oiseau fait son nid
BelloFratello



Joined: 04 May 2016
Posts: 67



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/16 6:10 pm    ::: Re: Olivia poupa Reply Reply with quote

Shades wrote:
BelloFratello wrote:

Also if anyone has any names of international players who should be looked at for 2017 either in the draft or as free agents that would be sensational!


I've been hearing bella things about poupa. Wink


Sorry Shades, but I'm not sure I can see a fit on the Lynx. Unless you're ready to say adios to Anna Cruz?



_________________
Petit a petit, l'oiseau fait son nid
Shades



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63711



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/16 6:37 pm    ::: Re: Olivia poupa Reply Reply with quote

BelloFratello wrote:
Shades wrote:
BelloFratello wrote:

Also if anyone has any names of international players who should be looked at for 2017 either in the draft or as free agents that would be sensational!


I've been hearing bella things about poupa. Wink


Sorry Shades, but I'm not sure I can see a fit on the Lynx. Unless you're ready to say adios to Anna Cruz?


Oh, I didn't realize you were inquiring for the Lynx.



_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
sammieee



Joined: 17 Jan 2009
Posts: 608



Back to top
PostPosted: 09/15/16 6:57 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Richyyy wrote:
If you turn 20 in the year of the draft, and you're not part of the NCAA system (and never have been, and have no established plans to join it), then you're eligible for that draft. Epoupa went undrafted when she was eligible a couple of years ago (which didn't make much sense to me at the time), and is therefore an unrestricted free agent in WNBA terms.

The screw-ups in the past were largely due to taking people who were too old to be eligible, with Yacoubou the most egregious example.

So, when would Angela Salvadores be eligible (since she went to Duke for a year, but will turn pro)? I figured someone would pick her as a 3rd round pick and stash her for a few years.


Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » WNBA All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 71, 72, 73  Next
Page 3 of 73

 
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