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

Welcome to the W.N.B.A.: Good Luck Finding a Job

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



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 56177
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/05/18 1:44 pm    ::: Welcome to the W.N.B.A.: Good Luck Finding a Job Reply Reply with quote

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/05/sports/wnba-los-angeles-sparks.html

Quote:
Not only are there fewer players in the W.N.B.A., the odds of being drafted are worse than in other sports. According to the N.C.A.A.’s 2018 report, which uses data from the 2016-17 season, 0.9 percent of draft-eligible players were chosen by W.N.B.A. teams, less than the N.B.A. (1.2 percent), the N.F.L. (1.6 percent), M.L.S. (1.4 percent), the N.H.L. (6.4 percent) and M.L.B. (9.5 percent). Including those who joined teams overseas, only 4.9 percent of eligible women’s basketball players played professionally last season, compared with 19.3 percent for men’s basketball.



_________________
Why can't we sit in the park like other boys and girls?
Why do we have to walk in the subway tunnel?


Just keep walking
WfanFrJmp



Joined: 24 May 2016
Posts: 626



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/05/18 2:22 pm    ::: Re: Welcome to the W.N.B.A.: Good Luck Finding a Job Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/05/sports/wnba-los-angeles-sparks.html

Quote:
Not only are there fewer players in the W.N.B.A., the odds of being drafted are worse than in other sports. According to the N.C.A.A.’s 2018 report, which uses data from the 2016-17 season, 0.9 percent of draft-eligible players were chosen by W.N.B.A. teams, less than the N.B.A. (1.2 percent), the N.F.L. (1.6 percent), M.L.S. (1.4 percent), the N.H.L. (6.4 percent) and M.L.B. (9.5 percent). Including those who joined teams overseas, only 4.9 percent of eligible women’s basketball players played professionally last season, compared with 19.3 percent for men’s basketball.


Yeah, I just read this. It's crazy! It's not going to be pretty over the next few weeks. I know this is not the point of the story, but they mention the about the need for the players to actually watch the W...to be familiar with the players and have an edge. It's so odd to me that they don't, particularly those who desire to play professionally.


Randy



Joined: 08 Oct 2011
Posts: 7278



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/05/18 3:43 pm    ::: Re: Welcome to the W.N.B.A.: Good Luck Finding a Job Reply Reply with quote

WfanFrJmp wrote:
pilight wrote:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/05/sports/wnba-los-angeles-sparks.html

Quote:
Not only are there fewer players in the W.N.B.A., the odds of being drafted are worse than in other sports. According to the N.C.A.A.’s 2018 report, which uses data from the 2016-17 season, 0.9 percent of draft-eligible players were chosen by W.N.B.A. teams, less than the N.B.A. (1.2 percent), the N.F.L. (1.6 percent), M.L.S. (1.4 percent), the N.H.L. (6.4 percent) and M.L.B. (9.5 percent). Including those who joined teams overseas, only 4.9 percent of eligible women’s basketball players played professionally last season, compared with 19.3 percent for men’s basketball.


Yeah, I just read this. It's crazy! It's not going to be pretty over the next few weeks. I know this is not the point of the story, but they mention the about the need for the players to actually watch the W...to be familiar with the players and have an edge. It's so odd to me that they don't, particularly those who desire to play professionally.


They are too busy watching LeBron, KD, and Stef.



_________________
The fault...lies not not in our stars but in ourselves that we are losers.
Ay Mate



Joined: 12 Nov 2016
Posts: 1002



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/05/18 4:09 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

If the younger players can’t be bothered watching the WNBA, then fuck them, I hope they don’t get drafted and make WNBA teams. If young female basketball players don’t follow the WNBA first and foremost, that’s their problem. They are idiots.


toad455



Joined: 16 Nov 2005
Posts: 15923



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/05/18 4:39 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Expansion!!



_________________
LET'S GO LIBERTY!!!!!!

Twitter: @TBRBWAY
WNBA 09



Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 5763
Location: Dallas , Texas


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/05/18 11:28 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

toad455 wrote:
Expansion!!


This is starting to seem inevitable...



_________________
3-Time WNBA Champion-3-Time National Champion-4-Time Olympic Champion....And Yes DT "We Got Confeti" lol
Happycappie25



Joined: 07 Feb 2006
Posts: 3931
Location: QUEENS!!!!


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/06/18 6:37 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

WNBA 09 wrote:
toad455 wrote:
Expansion!!


This is starting to seem inevitable...


It is the easiest solution but it's a chicken or egg issue for the league...we do need expansion as the talent pool is deeper...but the ownership is not there and we needed a Houdini save to avoid contraction this year...I do think this will come up in cba talks...but it's tricky enough that I don't wanna hijack this thread but I agree expansion will need to happen at some point...too many good players not getting a shot



_________________
"Leave it to the NCAA women's basketball committee to turn a glass slipper into glass ceiling" Graham Hays
NYL_WNBA_FAN



Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 11675



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/06/18 7:09 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I've enjoyed the 12 teams from the standpoint of competitiveness. Even the bottom teams can compete with the top teams which increases the likelihood of seeing good games no matter who plays. That said, every team now has at least one star player. Many teams have two. The best teams have 3 of what you would consider franchise-type players or close to it. If you roll back ten years, an all-star caliber PG like Chelsea Gray in a 16-team league might have been the best player on a team and that team's franchise player. On LA, she is awesome but still a clear third behind the big two. I think a move up to 14 teams would be ideal from a competitive standpoint. 24 more players would be enough to gradually spread the talent pool around without hurting the parity that we see today.



_________________
The poster formerly known as LibWNBAFan.
Aladyyn



Joined: 23 Jul 2017
Posts: 598
Location: Czech Republic


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/06/18 8:06 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Ay Mate wrote:
If the younger players can’t be bothered watching the WNBA, then fuck them, I hope they don’t get drafted and make WNBA teams. If young female basketball players don’t follow the WNBA first and foremost, that’s their problem. They are idiots.

This is harsh but 100% true.

Expansion will spread the talent pool too thin. There is lots of talent at the top but honestly the role players in this league are pretty bad.


toad455



Joined: 16 Nov 2005
Posts: 15923



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/06/18 8:56 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Aladyyn wrote:
Ay Mate wrote:
If the younger players can’t be bothered watching the WNBA, then fuck them, I hope they don’t get drafted and make WNBA teams. If young female basketball players don’t follow the WNBA first and foremost, that’s their problem. They are idiots.

This is harsh but 100% true.

Expansion will spread the talent pool too thin. There is lots of talent at the top but honestly the role players in this league are pretty bad.


I've said this before, but the league was at 16 teams from 2000-2002 with less talent and the level of play wasn't anywhere what it is today. You expand to 14 and basically anyone who's a 6th woman on their team becomes a starter. We'll see who are the last cuts in a week or so, but those players would be the ones to make a roster if the league were at 14 teams. And who knows, maybe players like Ivory Latta, Tiffany Jackson, etc. wouldn't be forced into retirement under this scenario.



_________________
LET'S GO LIBERTY!!!!!!

Twitter: @TBRBWAY
Shades



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 47323



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/06/18 9:50 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Tiffany Jackson wasn’t forced into retirement. She grabbed a new opportunity when it was presented. Probably saw the writing on the wall for the coming years.



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



Joined: 12 Aug 2014
Posts: 577



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/06/18 10:03 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

So duck the younger players huh. Well these younger players, some of who have huge followings on social media tend to love the game until they are ripped apart, shit on, go to trainingcamps and the coach doesn’t even have the decency to talk to them as they are sent packing etc. Seems that maybe the whole system is a problem. If we want the youngins to keep their love and interest in the game, why not focus a little more on making it a more friendly atmosphere. As fans we complain about the lack of info and contact etc. imagine how they all feel.


ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 8766



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/06/18 11:29 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Luckily, at least from my point of view, expansion is unlikely because of the $2 million annual loss that can be expected, and the $0 value of a franchise. (Yes, some teams turn a small profit, but a new team would take time to establish financially.)

The reason I say "luckily" is that there is not enough talent to stock two new teams that would be competitive in a couple years -- barring players demanding trades, etc. (in which case some other team would be bad).

The quality of the product is a major aspect of the WNBA, and any business, and expansion will make the quality worse. The question, of course, is how much worse -- my sense is "substantially" though reasonable people can disagree on this.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
Nixtreefan



Joined: 14 Nov 2012
Posts: 1840



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/06/18 11:33 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I disagree. There is talent but talent needs good coaching and if you think there is good coaching throughout the W then I may wear a toupee on my bald head and accept ridicule.


tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 6160



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/06/18 12:38 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:
Luckily, at least from my point of view, expansion is unlikely because of the $2 million annual loss that can be expected, and the $0 value of a franchise. (Yes, some teams turn a small profit, but a new team would take time to establish financially.)

The reason I say "luckily" is that there is not enough talent to stock two new teams that would be competitive in a couple years -- barring players demanding trades, etc. (in which case some other team would be bad).

The quality of the product is a major aspect of the WNBA, and any business, and expansion will make the quality worse. The question, of course, is how much worse -- my sense is "substantially" though reasonable people can disagree on this.


12 teams versus 14 teams doesn't appear to negative effect the average viewer - or at least it does not cancel out the increased interest from more metro areas being involved. Wikipedia says ESPN/ESPN2 viewership averaged 248,000 in the 14-team 2008 season. 12-team 2017 was the lowest average TV viewership ever (171,000), even lower than previous low of 12-team 2012, which was believed to be hurt by fewer games shown and the London Olympic games.


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 56177
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/06/18 1:04 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:
The reason I say "luckily" is that there is not enough talent to stock two new teams that would be competitive in a couple years -- barring players demanding trades, etc. (in which case some other team would be bad)


League history doesn't support this statement. We had 16 teams from 2000-2002. 13 of them made the playoffs during those three seasons. Two of the others got there in 2003, when we had 14 teams. The league has had 10 expansion teams in its history. 70% of those teams were playoff teams within their first three seasons.



_________________
Why can't we sit in the park like other boys and girls?
Why do we have to walk in the subway tunnel?


Just keep walking
Richyyy



Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 20057
Location: London


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/06/18 2:35 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
ClayK wrote:
The reason I say "luckily" is that there is not enough talent to stock two new teams that would be competitive in a couple years -- barring players demanding trades, etc. (in which case some other team would be bad)


League history doesn't support this statement. We had 16 teams from 2000-2002. 13 of them made the playoffs during those three seasons. Two of the others got there in 2003, when we had 14 teams. The league has had 10 expansion teams in its history. 70% of those teams were playoff teams within their first three seasons.

What counts as a good or 'competitive' team, anyway? There were only two, maybe three teams ever going to win the championship last year barring catastrophic injury issues. But there were a maximum of two teams who were ever really out of playoff contention until the very final days. Having 14 (or even 16) instead of 12 probably doesn't change any of that very much.

And as ClayK has often pointed out, a city/area having some interest in the WNBA rather than absolutely none is often driven by having a team in the area. More teams, more interested areas. Which should only be good.



_________________
Independent WNBA coverage: http://www.wnbalien.com/
toad455



Joined: 16 Nov 2005
Posts: 15923



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/06/18 3:12 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The Bay Area, Tennessee, Houston, Cleveland, Portland all have or had a fan base to support women's basketball. There's definitely worthy cities to support a team, just need a few committed ownership groups. Finding one for the Liberty in New York is probably the league's priority this season/off-season.



_________________
LET'S GO LIBERTY!!!!!!

Twitter: @TBRBWAY
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 10324
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump isn't potus. If u were in my safe space, you'd have to be f'd up


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/06/18 6:28 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

It seems to be hard for some W fans to understand that there is, relatively speaking, little interest in the sport.

The fact that the league must be run in the summer is the first clue. That salaries are pathetic is another. TV ratings drive home the point.

Expansion is the last thing the league needs, imo. If anything, it should lose 2 more teams to continue to improve the product and give its fans mo better ball.

In the meantime, forget about it becoming something other than a niche sport/league. Never gonna happen, unfortunately.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people.
ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 8766



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/06/18 6:36 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Richyyy wrote:
pilight wrote:
ClayK wrote:
The reason I say "luckily" is that there is not enough talent to stock two new teams that would be competitive in a couple years -- barring players demanding trades, etc. (in which case some other team would be bad)


League history doesn't support this statement. We had 16 teams from 2000-2002. 13 of them made the playoffs during those three seasons. Two of the others got there in 2003, when we had 14 teams. The league has had 10 expansion teams in its history. 70% of those teams were playoff teams within their first three seasons.

What counts as a good or 'competitive' team, anyway? There were only two, maybe three teams ever going to win the championship last year barring catastrophic injury issues. But there were a maximum of two teams who were ever really out of playoff contention until the very final days. Having 14 (or even 16) instead of 12 probably doesn't change any of that very much.

And as ClayK has often pointed out, a city/area having some interest in the WNBA rather than absolutely none is often driven by having a team in the area. More teams, more interested areas. Which should only be good.


Excellent point, as are the others. I will concede that perhaps you are right, but I think a higher quality of play is better in the long run than a short-term bump in ratings.

The coaching aspect is one I hadn't thought of either, but it's interesting too.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
Richyyy



Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 20057
Location: London


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/06/18 7:17 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
It seems to be hard for some W fans to understand that there is, relatively speaking, little interest in the sport.

The fact that the league must be run in the summer is the first clue. That salaries are pathetic is another. TV ratings drive home the point.

Expansion is the last thing the league needs, imo. If anything, it should lose 2 more teams to continue to improve the product and give its fans mo better ball.

In the meantime, forget about it becoming something other than a niche sport/league. Never gonna happen, unfortunately.

I think we're all pretty well aware that this is a niche sport with limited interest. Does that mean everyone should give up on it ever being more than that? Sports do grow in interest. Since I was a kid, America's lack of interest in soccer was a running joke. Now you've got MLS surviving for decades, thriving in some places, and American sports sites and writers actually paying attention to the Premier League and Champions League. Things do change.

As for shrinking the league to improve the product, at what point does tedium become a bigger issue than 'quality of basketball'? Because surely, theoretically, if all we were interested in was the quality of the play we'd only need 24 players - two teams, playing each other over and over again. But it'd be great basketball, because it'd only be the best 24 players on the planet. Personally, I'd be bored to fucking tears. Even with the current twelve, and obviously as a big fan, I'm often left thinking things like "wait, didn't we watch Atlanta play Chicago last week?" It gets tedious watching the same damn teams play each other repeatedly. I'd like four more teams just to increase the variety. Different teams take on personalities, create their own narratives, and even have their own playing styles to make the league more interesting.

Once we had a few years to spread the talent base back out - because expansion teams inevitably suck to start with - I don't think the quality of play would be much different. We'd recalibrate on the fly as to what a good player was, and who was an effective role player, or whatever. And because stars would still work themselves into clumps on good teams, just like we've seen repeatedly in the NBA over recent decades, we'd still get top quality play at the top end. Maybe LA's hypothetical backcourt would've been Sims/Williams instead of Gray/Sims, or Minnesota would've had Sugar Rodgers on the perimeter or Damiris Dantas at center, but we'd still get star teams. Then a load of middling ones and a few crappy ones. The league would cope.



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



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 8766



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/07/18 9:22 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The partnership with ESPN is, in many ways, keeping the league alive, so ESPN's input is going to be paid attention to.

For ESPN, the national ratings are the key, and regional success is secondary. Given how ESPN promotes sports, it would seem they would be OK as long as the stars shine. Then again, there is a level of familiarity with teams that drives ratings as well (UConn, anyone?) and more teams might make marketing harder.

Expansion would absolutely help regionally, but ESPN could be a roadblock.

All that said, though, if six prospective owners arrived with checkbooks out, we'd have an 18-team league in 2019.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
Richyyy



Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 20057
Location: London


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/07/18 9:44 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:
All that said, though, if six prospective owners arrived with checkbooks out, we'd have an 18-team league in 2019.

I would suggest that a significant part of the problem is the general 'expansion' idea. It's not like we saw lots of stories about how Tulsa or San Antonio (or even Detroit, from what I can remember) desperately wanted to get rid of their teams and there was nowhere for them to go. They were just moving, immediately, to new cities and (usually) new owners who wanted them in those new places. So either these owners wanted the chance for their new toy to be competitive quickly, or they were worried that the potential fanbase would lose interest quickly if the team was terrible for it's first couple of years (probably a bit of both). Or the league doesn't actually want to expand beyond 12, so prospective new owners have to wait until a team becomes available.

But what we really need is a good way to make expansion teams competitive without having to wait too long. It's tough, because existing teams don't want to give away good players for nothing, and crappy teams don't want their draft picks dropping just to let in the new teams above them. But I think that's where we need some thought, and some useful ideas. Otherwise, with the regularity of owners deciding they've had enough, prospective new entries are always going to be tempted to wait until an existing team becomes available, rather than starting from scratch.



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



Joined: 08 Oct 2011
Posts: 7278



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/07/18 10:32 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

One way to make expansion teams more successful would be to adjust the expansion draft so that the best team (LA, MN now) would have less players that they could protect than middling teams. Lottery teams could protect more. Expansion teams would also get a lottery pick with some "reasonable" odds.



_________________
The fault...lies not not in our stars but in ourselves that we are losers.
toad455



Joined: 16 Nov 2005
Posts: 15923



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/07/18 10:35 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Completely agree that any expansion teams should be put into the lottery.



_________________
LET'S GO LIBERTY!!!!!!

Twitter: @TBRBWAY
Richyyy



Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 20057
Location: London


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/07/18 10:45 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Randy wrote:
One way to make expansion teams more successful would be to adjust the expansion draft so that the best team (LA, MN now) would have less players that they could protect than middling teams. Lottery teams could protect more.

I think you'd really struggle to get the owners/GMs of the good teams to sign off on that. "Why should we have to give up more just because we've been better at acquiring/building/developing talent than they have?" Generally they're giving up a better player anyway because they've got more talent to start with. How about a system that doesn't allow teams to choose who they're protecting? Some sort of statistical metric that decides your four or five best players from last year, and they're safe, then you get one wild-card pick on top. Most of the time that wouldn't make much difference, but it'd mean the important vets would probably be forced into the 'protected' groups, and more young talent might be available to the expansion teams. It'd also limit the "she's a 'free agent', we don't need to protect her" moves you inevitably see.

I'm not sure what the answer is; I just feel like more thought needs to be put into it.



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



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 10324
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump isn't potus. If u were in my safe space, you'd have to be f'd up


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/07/18 11:49 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Richyyy wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
It seems to be hard for some W fans to understand that there is, relatively speaking, little interest in the sport.

The fact that the league must be run in the summer is the first clue. That salaries are pathetic is another. TV ratings drive home the point.

Expansion is the last thing the league needs, imo. If anything, it should lose 2 more teams to continue to improve the product and give its fans mo better ball.

In the meantime, forget about it becoming something other than a niche sport/league. Never gonna happen, unfortunately.

I think we're all pretty well aware that this is a niche sport with limited interest. Does that mean everyone should give up on it ever being more than that? Sports do grow in interest. Since I was a kid, America's lack of interest in soccer was a running joke. Now you've got MLS surviving for decades, thriving in some places, and American sports sites and writers actually paying attention to the Premier League and Champions League. Things do change.

As for shrinking the league to improve the product, at what point does tedium become a bigger issue than 'quality of basketball'? Because surely, theoretically, if all we were interested in was the quality of the play we'd only need 24 players - two teams, playing each other over and over again. But it'd be great basketball, because it'd only be the best 24 players on the planet. Personally, I'd be bored to fucking tears. Even with the current twelve, and obviously as a big fan, I'm often left thinking things like "wait, didn't we watch Atlanta play Chicago last week?" It gets tedious watching the same damn teams play each other repeatedly. I'd like four more teams just to increase the variety. Different teams take on personalities, create their own narratives, and even have their own playing styles to make the league more interesting.

Once we had a few years to spread the talent base back out - because expansion teams inevitably suck to start with - I don't think the quality of play would be much different. We'd recalibrate on the fly as to what a good player was, and who was an effective role player, or whatever. And because stars would still work themselves into clumps on good teams, just like we've seen repeatedly in the NBA over recent decades, we'd still get top quality play at the top end. Maybe LA's hypothetical backcourt would've been Sims/Williams instead of Gray/Sims, or Minnesota would've had Sugar Rodgers on the perimeter or Damiris Dantas at center, but we'd still get star teams. Then a load of middling ones and a few crappy ones. The league would cope.



I'm not sure the history of the MLS has much to offer re: projections for the WNBA since the MLS offers the U.S. public the best soccer it can see in country.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people.
SportsGuru



Joined: 20 May 2005
Posts: 4240



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/10/18 10:37 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I'm surprise to learn Loryn Goodwin has been waived this early. I wanted the Mystics to draft Loryn Goodwin in the 2nd round but the Dallas Wings selected her with the 18 pick of the 2018 WNBA Draft, the Mystics had the 19th pick and selected Hines-Allen.

Thus far, I believe as a write this post Loryn Goodwin is the highest 2018 WNBA draftee who has been waived.


Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 10959
Location: Oklahoma (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/11/18 9:28 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

SportsGuru wrote:
I'm surprise to learn Loryn Goodwin has been waived this early. I wanted the Mystics to draft Loryn Goodwin in the 2nd round but the Dallas Wings selected her with the 18 pick of the 2018 WNBA Draft, the Mystics had the 19th pick and selected Hines-Allen.

Thus far, I believe as a write this post Loryn Goodwin is the highest 2018 WNBA draftee who has been waived.


....speaking of which....

Is there a place here or another site that has the updated list of waivers??

I can't find it on the .com, or espn.



_________________
Oklahoma: Go Sooners!

<--Maddie Manning, Sooner Extraordinaire
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 6160



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/11/18 11:24 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
SportsGuru wrote:
I'm surprise to learn Loryn Goodwin has been waived this early. I wanted the Mystics to draft Loryn Goodwin in the 2nd round but the Dallas Wings selected her with the 18 pick of the 2018 WNBA Draft, the Mystics had the 19th pick and selected Hines-Allen.

Thus far, I believe as a write this post Loryn Goodwin is the highest 2018 WNBA draftee who has been waived.


....speaking of which....

Is there a place here or another site that has the updated list of waivers??

I can't find it on the .com, or espn.


They will get announced on Twitter, and maybe other places sooner, but in theory, they all shown up here eventually.

http://www.wnba.com/transactions/


Shades



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 47323



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/11/18 11:48 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

SportsGuru wrote:

Thus far, I believe as a write this post Loryn Goodwin is the highest 2018 WNBA draftee who has been waived.


Yep, she’ll likely end up being the highest cut. Just goes to show you how surprisingly deep are the Wings.



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



Joined: 31 Jan 2009
Posts: 4432



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/11/18 2:19 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Shades wrote:
SportsGuru wrote:

Thus far, I believe as a write this post Loryn Goodwin is the highest 2018 WNBA draftee who has been waived.


Yep, she’ll likely end up being the highest cut. Just goes to show you how surprisingly deep are the Wings.


I agree that Goodwin will most likely be the highest cut, but I don't think Nared at 13, or Gulich at 12 are complete locks yet, and there is enough competition in Conn that L. Brown could get bumped if the Sun keep both Romero and Banham.


Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 10959
Location: Oklahoma (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/11/18 2:44 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Thanks, tfan....I KNOW it's always there, but I cannot ever find it! Razz



_________________
Oklahoma: Go Sooners!

<--Maddie Manning, Sooner Extraordinaire
Shades



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 47323



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/11/18 2:49 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

J-Spoon wrote:
Shades wrote:
SportsGuru wrote:

Thus far, I believe as a write this post Loryn Goodwin is the highest 2018 WNBA draftee who has been waived.


Yep, she’ll likely end up being the highest cut. Just goes to show you how surprisingly deep are the Wings.


I agree that Goodwin will most likely be the highest cut, but I don't think Nared at 13, or Gulich at 12 are complete locks yet, and there is enough competition in Conn that L. Brown could get bumped if the Sun keep both Romero and Banham.


Even though Aces camp is remarkably competitive, I think Laimbeer will find a way to keep Nared. As far as Gulich goes, did PHX even set her up with any sort of competition? She showed up in the preseason game. I consider her a lock. The whole first round is a lock for me. Miller took a lot of heat for trading EWill so that he could draft Banham. Banham has struggled with injuries her whole career and has managed to survive. I can’t see Miller cutting a healthy Lexie Brown after a few weeks. Just too much potential there, not to mention the heat he’d get wasting the pick. She’s a lock.

I’m projecting 100% survival rate for first round picks.

For second round, I’m projecting 66.7% survival rate including deferrals.
Goodwin, Scaife, and Lawrence have already been cut. I’m adding Musina to the cut list... hard to say if another team will pick her up.
I think there’s a chance Shakayla Thomas could be cut or traded. If she’s cut, she’s likely to get picked up, so I consider her a survivor.

Third round is looking bleak. Only likely survivors will be the two deferrals. Maybe an outside chance #36 makes the team later when they can afford 12 player roster. Talk of Stewart being used at SF plus Clark getting a multi-year deal makes it seem like there won’t be much room for Muldrow.



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



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 10959
Location: Oklahoma (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/17/18 11:10 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Names like Hooper, Larkins, Allen, Peters, Russell, and R. Gray waived: Shocked



_________________
Oklahoma: Go Sooners!

<--Maddie Manning, Sooner Extraordinaire
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