| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9605
Back to top |
 Posted: 12/22/17 3:10 pm ::: |
Reply  |
|
| Shades wrote: |
I know her FT shooting is undisciplined. 53% from a player that athletic? |
If anything, I think there is an inverse relationship between athleticism and free throw shooting percentage in college. And also an inverse relationship between height and free throw percentage.
|
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63761
Back to top |
| Posted: 12/22/17 3:18 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| tfan wrote: |
| Shades wrote: |
I know her FT shooting is undisciplined. 53% from a player that athletic? |
If anything, I think there is an inverse relationship between athleticism and free throw shooting percentage in college. And also an inverse relationship between height and free throw percentage. |
Not seeing it.
_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
|
|
#Occasionalwnbafan
Joined: 01 Mar 2012
Posts: 1380
Back to top |
| Posted: 12/22/17 5:35 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Gabby would fit well in Indy, they are lacking a play making point guard and she would fit well with Durpee. Chicago would also be a good fit, playing with post players who can stretch the floor. I also wouldn't mind seeing her in Dallas, if Cambage doesn't show up, Johnson and Williams could make for an exciting undersized front court, I think there a few WNBA post players Williams can guard. I can't see Wilson not going number one, 24 and 10 on the year, and she's added a 3 ball. |
|
WNBA 09
Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 12528
Location: Dallas , Texas
Back to top |
| Posted: 12/22/17 5:43 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| #Occasionalwnbafan wrote: |
| Gabby would fit well in Indy, they are lacking a play making point guard and she would fit well with Durpee. Chicago would also be a good fit, playing with post players who can stretch the floor. I also wouldn't mind seeing her in Dallas, if Cambage doesn't show up, Johnson and Williams could make for an exciting undersized front court, I think there a few WNBA post players Williams can guard. I can't see Wilson not going number one, 24 and 10 on the year, and she's added a 3 ball. |
Gabby in Indy could be a bit congested. They need 3 point shooting and a scorer .
_________________
3-Time WNBA Champion-3-Time National Champion-4-Time Olympic Champion....And Yes DT "We Got Confeti" lol
|
|
Rock Hard
Joined: 02 Aug 2010
Posts: 5376
Location: Chocolate Paradise
Back to top |
|
Iluvacc
Joined: 11 Jun 2005
Posts: 4167
Back to top |
| Posted: 12/22/17 7:05 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| tfan wrote: |
My impression is that there are a number of players that went from relying on being athletic in college to being able to hit outside shots in the pros. Like Brunson, Cash and Catchings. Tamika Williams was someone who I think didn't get an outside shot. And It seems common for players to increase their shooting range as well. |
Those players are the exception and not the rule.
|
|
sigur3
Joined: 18 Jun 2013
Posts: 6191
Location: Chicago-ish
Back to top |
| Posted: 12/22/17 8:07 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Iluvacc wrote: |
| tfan wrote: |
My impression is that there are a number of players that went from relying on being athletic in college to being able to hit outside shots in the pros. Like Brunson, Cash and Catchings. Tamika Williams was someone who I think didn't get an outside shot. And It seems common for players to increase their shooting range as well. |
Those players are the exception and not the rule. |
It also took Brunson 14 seasons to do it, and Cash was never a good 3pt shooter. She had one good season from behind the arc. So I don't think those are very good examples.
However, with the direction the game is moving in, I don't think it's going to take Gabby THAT long to improve her range. It's not like her jumper is broken beyond repair (Alyssa Thomas)
|
|
awhom111
Joined: 19 Nov 2014
Posts: 4225
Back to top |
| Posted: 12/22/17 9:49 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Does anyone actually believe that there is any chance that a lottery pick is used on Vadeeva? I feel like Shades could win some bets with people on other boards right now. This is especially true in cases where people don't really know how the international draft rules work. On the other hand, we do live in a world where a pick was squandered on Astan Dabo before she had even played a first division game in France.
I do wonder if the teams that have one of her teammates or Phoenix due to the Lange/national team connection have better knowledge about her plans than the other teams. |
|
PickledGinger
Joined: 04 Oct 2013
Posts: 1362
Back to top |
| Posted: 12/22/17 9:50 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| For what it's worth, Catchings actually shot better from outside (by >1%) in college than she did in her WNBA career.
|
|
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9605
Back to top |
| Posted: 12/22/17 10:09 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| PickledGinger wrote: |
| For what it's worth, Catchings actually shot better from outside (by >1%) in college than she did in her WNBA career. |
Three pointers? If not, how are you factoring in shooting distance into 2-point percentage?
|
|
Richyyy
Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 24347
Location: London
Back to top |
| Posted: 12/22/17 10:18 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| awhom111 wrote: |
Does anyone actually believe that there is any chance that a lottery pick is used on Vadeeva? I feel like Shades could win some bets with people on other boards right now. This is especially true in cases where people don't really know how the international draft rules work. On the other hand, we do live in a world where a pick was squandered on Astan Dabo before she had even played a first division game in France.
I do wonder if the teams that have one of her teammates or Phoenix due to the Lange/national team connection have better knowledge about her plans than the other teams. |
Despite what I've mentioned before, from what I hear, yes, something like top-6 is definitely on the table for Vadeeva. And I don't think teams need players/coaches in Europe to know all about her and to actively investigate whether she's going to play in the WNBA (and whether that might happen immediately). Teams have been known to receive differing information on players like that, when agents try to guide their player to certain destinations, but who knows what her priorities would be. Playing with a coach she's familiar with? Playing with teammates she's already had in Russia? On a team where she'd be guaranteed heavy minutes? Where she'd be more likely to win immediately?
But if she says she's coming, we're talking about a player who's been one of the leading producers in Europe on those same teams that the Ogwumikes, McCoughtrys and Parkers of the world play on since she was 17-18. And she's a big. She'd likely have a few growing pains adapting to the US and the WNBA game, but if that player's American, aren't people wondering if it's her or Wilson?
Also, given that one team has multiple lottery picks, sometimes that makes them braver to go a little left-field with one of them... |
|
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9605
Back to top |
| Posted: 12/22/17 10:20 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| sigur3 wrote: |
| Iluvacc wrote: |
| tfan wrote: |
My impression is that there are a number of players that went from relying on being athletic in college to being able to hit outside shots in the pros. Like Brunson, Cash and Catchings. Tamika Williams was someone who I think didn't get an outside shot. And It seems common for players to increase their shooting range as well. |
Those players are the exception and not the rule. |
It also took Brunson 14 seasons to do it, and Cash was never a good 3pt shooter. She had one good season from behind the arc. So I don't think those are very good examples.) |
I am not just talking about 3-point shooting. I think many players, including Brunson and Cash, are able to start hitting two-point jump shots (versus in close putbacks) or hit two-point jump shots further out, as their career ages. But I don't know if any site captures distance for 2-point shots. If a layup is always counted the same as a fifteen-foot jump shot you won't be able to statistically capture an increasing range.
|
|
Richyyy
Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 24347
Location: London
Back to top |
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63761
Back to top |
| Posted: 12/22/17 11:52 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Richyyy wrote: |
| awhom111 wrote: |
Does anyone actually believe that there is any chance that a lottery pick is used on Vadeeva? I feel like Shades could win some bets with people on other boards right now. This is especially true in cases where people don't really know how the international draft rules work. On the other hand, we do live in a world where a pick was squandered on Astan Dabo before she had even played a first division game in France.
I do wonder if the teams that have one of her teammates or Phoenix due to the Lange/national team connection have better knowledge about her plans than the other teams. |
Despite what I've mentioned before, from what I hear, yes, something like top-6 is definitely on the table for Vadeeva. And I don't think teams need players/coaches in Europe to know all about her and to actively investigate whether she's going to play in the WNBA (and whether that might happen immediately). |
You should share what you heard, because you went from second round to Top 6. That's quite a flip.
| Richyyy wrote: |
| Teams have been known to receive differing information on players like that, when agents try to guide their player to certain destinations |
Sounds like Ndour, who told some teams she wasn't interested in coming over while telling another team something else. She was another player who was all hyped and never amounted to much.
| Richyyy wrote: |
| but who knows what her priorities would be. Playing with a coach she's familiar with? Playing with teammates she's already had in Russia? On a team where she'd be guaranteed heavy minutes? Where she'd be more likely to win immediately? |
Is her name Vadeeva or Vadiva? If this is her actual thought process, I'm not impressed and would take a pass.
| Richyyy wrote: |
| But if she says she's coming, we're talking about a player who's been one of the leading producers in Europe on those same teams that the Ogwumikes, McCoughtrys and Parkers of the world play on since she was 17-18. And she's a big. She'd likely have a few growing pains adapting to the US and the WNBA game, but if that player's American, aren't people wondering if it's her or Wilson? |
But she's not American. Her stats don't blow me away. Why does she only play only 20 mpg?
| Richyyy wrote: |
| Also, given that one team has multiple lottery picks, sometimes that makes them braver to go a little left-field with one of them... |
Last year, Chicago had two first round picks and neither played in the WNBA. Time for them to get less brave and more smart.
_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
|
|
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9605
Back to top |
| Posted: 12/23/17 12:47 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Thanks. I looked at Brunson because she is a player that I have definitely thought "what is Brunson doing hitting 18 footers!?" multiple times.
But the data doesn't show what I was expecting: a more consistent rise in percentage made. The more significant increase was in the percentage of long distance 2's she took later in her career.
The 3-point line changed in 2013 so 16-21 was 16-20 before that. Brunson didn't shoot 3-pointers of any significance until 2017. I left out that column due to formatting issues. "% total" means the % of total shot attempts that were attempted from that range.
| Code: |
Year 1 to 5 feet 6 to 10 11 to 15 16 to 21
Made Att % Total % Made Att % total % Made Att % total % Made Att % total %
2004 34 58 41.43% 58.62% 14 36 25.71% 38.89% 7 33 23.57% 21.21% 4 13 9.29% 30.77%
2005 63 113 45.93% 55.75% 14 52 21.14% 26.92% 17 54 21.95% 31.48% 11 27 10.98% 40.74%
2006 69 114 55.88% 60.53% 13 37 18.14% 35.14% 8 37 18.14% 21.62% 4 16 7.84% 25.00%
2007 101 180 60.40% 56.11% 17 61 20.47% 27.87% 17 34 11.41% 50.00% 6 19 6.38% 31.58%
2008 91 156 57.78% 58.33% 9 36 13.33% 25.00% 22 42 15.56% 52.38% 13 36 13.33% 36.11%
2009 87 151 59.22% 57.62% 6 23 9.02% 26.09% 23 54 21.18% 42.59% 8 26 10.20% 30.77%
2010 82 153 56.04% 53.59% 13 38 13.92% 34.21% 11 43 15.75% 25.58% 11 38 13.92% 28.95%
2011 85 150 55.97% 56.67% 18 37 13.81% 48.65% 21 51 19.03% 41.18% 13 30 11.19% 43.33%
2012 76 133 48.72% 57.14% 13 28 10.26% 46.43% 21 53 19.41% 39.62% 28 59 21.61% 47.46%
2013 88 123 41.55% 71.54% 7 29 9.80% 24.14% 14 39 13.18% 35.90% 37 104 35.14% 35.58%
2014 19 39 48.15% 48.72% 2 6 7.41% 33.33% 4 10 12.35% 40.00% 7 26 32.10% 26.92%
2015 68 110 47.83% 61.82% 7 30 13.04% 23.33% 11 28 12.17% 39.29% 18 58 25.22% 31.03%
2016 53 99 51.30% 53.54% 8 16 8.29% 50.00% 13 30 15.54% 43.33% 18 47 24.35% 38.30%
2017 48 83 34.16% 57.83% 10 28 11.52% 35.71% 11 23 9.47% 47.83% 17 43 17.70% 39.53%
All 964 1662 50.83% 58.00% 151 457 13.98% 33.04% 200 531 16.24% 37.66% 195 542 16.57% 35.98% |
|
|
awhom111
Joined: 19 Nov 2014
Posts: 4225
Back to top |
| Posted: 12/23/17 7:56 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Shades wrote: |
| Richyyy wrote: |
| awhom111 wrote: |
Does anyone actually believe that there is any chance that a lottery pick is used on Vadeeva? I feel like Shades could win some bets with people on other boards right now. This is especially true in cases where people don't really know how the international draft rules work. On the other hand, we do live in a world where a pick was squandered on Astan Dabo before she had even played a first division game in France.
I do wonder if the teams that have one of her teammates or Phoenix due to the Lange/national team connection have better knowledge about her plans than the other teams. |
Despite what I've mentioned before, from what I hear, yes, something like top-6 is definitely on the table for Vadeeva. And I don't think teams need players/coaches in Europe to know all about her and to actively investigate whether she's going to play in the WNBA (and whether that might happen immediately). |
You should share what you heard, because you went from second round to Top 6. That's quite a flip.
| Richyyy wrote: |
| Teams have been known to receive differing information on players like that, when agents try to guide their player to certain destinations |
Sounds like Ndour, who told some teams she wasn't interested in coming over while telling another team something else. She was another player who was all hyped and never amounted to much.
| Richyyy wrote: |
| but who knows what her priorities would be. Playing with a coach she's familiar with? Playing with teammates she's already had in Russia? On a team where she'd be guaranteed heavy minutes? Where she'd be more likely to win immediately? |
Is her name Vadeeva or Vadiva? If this is her actual thought process, I'm not impressed and would take a pass.
| Richyyy wrote: |
| But if she says she's coming, we're talking about a player who's been one of the leading producers in Europe on those same teams that the Ogwumikes, McCoughtrys and Parkers of the world play on since she was 17-18. And she's a big. She'd likely have a few growing pains adapting to the US and the WNBA game, but if that player's American, aren't people wondering if it's her or Wilson? |
But she's not American. Her stats don't blow me away. Why does she only play only 20 mpg?
| Richyyy wrote: |
| Also, given that one team has multiple lottery picks, sometimes that makes them braver to go a little left-field with one of them... |
Last year, Chicago had two first round picks and neither played in the WNBA. Time for them to get less brave and more smart. |
I wouldn't use a top 8 pick on her, but it's a bit of a different story if you're just scoring her strictly as a prospect on a big board basis and not a mock draft. There top 6 is an easy enough jump and top 4 is arguable, even if I would not agree (even with no early entries).
There some good reasons for her not playing huge minutes, such as the value of Ciak as a veteran defensive presence and the potency of the Cruz-Prince-McCoughtry-Petrovic-Ogwumike smallball lineup. Sometimes you actually have to watch a player to get an idea of what she can do now and what she might do in the future.
Here's my quick scouting report:
Strengths:
-Complete post game with a variety of moves and counters
-Soft touch on a jumpshot with a range that has expanded every year
-Relentless pursuer of offensive rebounds
-Plays fearlessly in any situation including against stronger, older opponents
Weaknesses:
-Overly aggressive on defense
-Can get visibly frustrated and too emotional on the court when things don't go her way
-Lacks tools to be an effective rim protector
-Needs to improve decision making in situations where a shot is not her best option |
|
root_thing
Joined: 28 Apr 2007
Posts: 7365
Location: Underground
Back to top |
| Posted: 12/23/17 11:21 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
I agree with what awhom111 said about Vadeeva's minutes. Ciak at 6-6 provides a much stronger defensive presence. Petrovic's 3-pt shooting ability stretches the floor and allows Kursk to play in a different way. I would also add that Kursk wins a lot of blowout games, so even the deep bench gets minutes.
The improvement I see in Vadeeva's game compared to last year is that she now puts the ball on the floor and takes it to the hoop a lot more. She has this favorite move where she spins around the defender, drives along the baseline, and then hits a reverse layup. The other thing she's doing that I never noticed before is run the floor and beat opponents down the court for uncontested layups. Combined with alertness, Vadeeva plays quicker than she looks.
That said, Vadeeva's lack of athletic ability limits her potential. I see her as a McCarville type player with better agility, but less toughness (for now). Wilson's ceiling is much higher -- maybe a taller version of Tina Charles.
_________________
You can always do something else.
|
|
Richyyy
Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 24347
Location: London
Back to top |
| Posted: 12/24/17 2:12 am ::: |
Reply |
|
I tend to agree on Vadeeva's lack of traditional athleticism. There are definitely times when she looks like the cliched big, slow, white girl in amongst the athletes flying around her (although often you then look up at the scoreboard and she's got 17 and 8 without you noticing). When I said 'her or Wilson' I really just meant if you based it purely on looking at her production at her age, and considering the level where she's done it. This isn't some scrawny kid putting up stats in the Finnish League or dominating a chair in tryouts.
I would also mention, just for the sake of argument, that as usual with the Euros she's younger than the American competition. She's basically got two years on Wilson, for example, so if she were American WNBA teams likely wouldn't be getting their hands on her until the draft with Ionescu et al in 2019.
But it still takes a brave GM to take her in a deep college draft, because inevitably she's more likely to miss seasons, and the transition to playing in the US is always tricky, however talented the player. |
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11136
Back to top |
| Posted: 12/24/17 9:55 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| What position would Vadeeva defend in the WNBA?
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8225
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
| Posted: 12/24/17 12:45 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| root_thing wrote: |
| Wilson . . . maybe a taller version of Tina Charles. |
As the immortal Judge Wapner would say: This assumes facts not in evidence.
I would like to see Vadeeva in the WNBA. I have no idea whether she's a good defender. What's the measure of that anyway, on-ball or off-ball, other than subjective impressions? Is anyone ever recruited into college or drafted into the W for their defense? Don't WNBA teams play zone? Defense is a team thing. Facing a man-to-man, any good offensive team can rub off a "great" individual defender in a few seconds. |
|
Richyyy
Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 24347
Location: London
Back to top |
| Posted: 12/24/17 12:58 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
| Don't WNBA teams play zone? |
Not much, no.
| ClayK wrote: |
| What position would Vadeeva defend in the WNBA? |
5s and some 4s, like every other true post in the league. |
|
toad455
Joined: 16 Nov 2005
Posts: 22473
Location: NJ
Back to top |
| Posted: 12/24/17 2:04 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Valid question: Is Gabby Williams still a lottery pick?
_________________
LET'S GO LIBERTY!!!!!!
Twitter: @TBRBWAY
|
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8225
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
| Posted: 12/24/17 2:41 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| toad455 wrote: |
| Valid question: Is Gabby Williams still a lottery pick? |
Williams "high value" has always been partly an illusion, in my opinion. I note that I covered her weaknesses in an earlier post in this thread last April.
This season so far, Williams' scoring and FG% have gone down and she's 0-4 on threes. She mainly scores on layups: steals from teams with crappy guards, putbacks, and sophisticated entry passes from her teammates. However, she doesn't get as many layups as last season because she doesn't go to the low paint when Collier leaves the game; Stevens, the much taller player, does.
Williams also had noticeable difficulty trying to navigate in the paint against Notre Dame's fairly large bodies, going 1-7.
That said, Williams has continued to be a well-above average rebounder for 5-11 (but 5-11 is 5-11), is a very good passer in Geno's sophisticated motion offense, and is an indefatigable hustler.
I keep reading that this is a deep draft. Really? Wilson, Mitchell, for sure. I'd say Williams is still in the top tier because the draft doesn't seem deep to me in terms of real star power. But then, it almost never does, which is probably just me. |
|
root_thing
Joined: 28 Apr 2007
Posts: 7365
Location: Underground
Back to top |
| Posted: 12/24/17 2:52 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
| root_thing wrote: |
| Wilson . . . maybe a taller version of Tina Charles. |
As the immortal Judge Wapner would say: This assumes facts not in evidence.. |
What does that mean? Do you think Wilson is significantly shorter than 6-5 or that Charles is taller than 6-4? USA Basketball used to list Charles as 6-3, and I think that's closer to her relative height compared to other posts I've seen. So far, I haven't noticed anything that would make me think Wilson is shorter than advertised.
| Richyyy wrote: |
I would also mention, just for the sake of argument, that as usual with the Euros she's younger than the American competition. She's basically got two years on Wilson, for example, so if she were American WNBA teams likely wouldn't be getting their hands on her until the draft with Ionescu et al in 2019. |
I've made that argument myself in the past. It comes down to what a player can do with that extra time. That's why I've been focused on how Vadeeva has improved since last year. But if she doesn't do something to improve physically -- and few players really undergo radical body makeovers -- then the question is how much more mileage can an already smart player get out of being smart. On the other hand, a player dependent on natural talent can get a lot more out of getting smarter. So, for instance, does 19 year old Vadeeva have more room for improvement or does 23 year old Imani McGee-Stafford who has tremendous physical gifts but is a chronic underachiever? Sometimes people sort of stay the same or improve marginally. I think of Ji-Su Park who led the U19 tournament in rebounding at age 14. You figured she'd be a superstar 4-5 years down the road, but she's merely a good Korean League player.
_________________
You can always do something else.
|
|
WNBA 09
Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 12528
Location: Dallas , Texas
Back to top |
| Posted: 12/24/17 3:07 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
| toad455 wrote: |
| Valid question: Is Gabby Williams still a lottery pick? |
Williams "high value" has always been partly an illusion, in my opinion. I note that I covered her weaknesses in an earlier post in this thread last April.
This season so far, Williams' scoring and FG% have gone down and she's 0-4 on threes. She mainly scores on layups: steals from teams with crappy guards, putbacks, and sophisticated entry passes from her teammates. However, she doesn't get as many layups as last season because she doesn't go to the low paint when Collier leaves the game; Stevens, the much taller player, does.
Williams also had noticeable difficulty trying to navigate in the paint against Notre Dame's fairly large bodies, going 1-7.
That said, Williams has continued to be a well-above average rebounder for 5-11 (but 5-11 is 5-11), is a very good passer in Geno's sophisticated motion offense, and is an indefatigable hustler.
I keep reading that this is a deep draft. Really? Wilson, Mitchell, for sure. I'd say Williams is still in the top tier because the draft doesn't seem deep to me in terms of real star power. But then, it almost never does, which is probably just me. |
And Me...this was a spot on assessment!
_________________
3-Time WNBA Champion-3-Time National Champion-4-Time Olympic Champion....And Yes DT "We Got Confeti" lol
|
|
|
|
