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

"The big girls are taking over' the WNBA" (ESPN)

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » WNBA
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
CamrnCrz1974



Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 17116
Location: Phoenix


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/25/18 5:30 pm    ::: "The big girls are taking over' the WNBA" (ESPN) Reply Reply with quote

"The big girls are taking over' the WNBA"
Mechelle Voepel (ESPN)

http://www.espn.com/wnba/story/_/id/23603487/brittney-griner-liz-cambage-sylvia-fowles-centers-again-dominating-wnba


Randy



Joined: 08 Oct 2011
Posts: 8566



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/25/18 5:39 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Ironically, the NBA seems to be going in the opposite direction.

ttps://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-the-nba-abandoned-roy-hibbert/

Rim protection and a low post game are not as important as being able to hit from 3.


rykhala



Joined: 15 Oct 2009
Posts: 271
Location: Saint Louis, MO


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/26/18 11:01 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Ugh. When can we retire that description? It so lazy to refer to professional basketball players as "big girls." At the very least, can't we afford them the respect of calling them women?


Shades



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 49189



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/26/18 11:05 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

How about “big athletes”?



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



Joined: 15 Oct 2009
Posts: 271
Location: Saint Louis, MO


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/26/18 11:06 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Even better.


rykhala



Joined: 15 Oct 2009
Posts: 271
Location: Saint Louis, MO


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/26/18 11:06 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Even better.


Randy



Joined: 08 Oct 2011
Posts: 8566



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/26/18 11:14 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Perhaps you should take that up with Brittany Griner.


Silky Johnson



Joined: 29 Sep 2014
Posts: 895



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/26/18 12:04 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The continued relevance of bigs in the WNBA is why the WNBA has started to catch up to the NBA, in terms of my favorite sport.

If the three-point ridiculousness in the NBA continues unabated, it won't be more than another couple seasons before the two switch places in my Top Two.



_________________
Professional Hater. The Baron of #HateHard
bballjunkie



Joined: 12 Aug 2014
Posts: 614



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/26/18 1:25 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Except it didn’t help the Lynx against the Sparks. Big girls won’t work on those teams that don’t have any shooters.


Silky Johnson



Joined: 29 Sep 2014
Posts: 895



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/26/18 1:33 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

bballjunkie wrote:
Except it didn’t help the Lynx against the Sparks...


Uhh... because LA also has one of those, and they canceled each other out. I mean, what definition of 'big' are you working with, that you think that Nneka Ogwumike doesn't qualify?



_________________
Professional Hater. The Baron of #HateHard
bballjunkie



Joined: 12 Aug 2014
Posts: 614



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/26/18 2:02 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

So 6’2” Nneka cancelled out Brunson 6’2”, Fowles 6’6”, Kizer 6’4”, Fagbenle 6’4”, that Nneka must be simply the best player in the world.


Shades



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 49189



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/26/18 2:13 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Minnesota beat themselves. That’s all there is to it. They didn’t have the focus or energy.



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



Joined: 29 Sep 2014
Posts: 895



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/26/18 3:12 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

bballjunkie wrote:
So 6’2” Nneka cancelled out Brunson 6’2”, Fowles 6’6”, Kizer 6’4”, Fagbenle 6’4”, that Nneka must be simply the best player in the world.


You're being deliberately obtuse right now. Voepel might have mentioned a few role-playing centers in her article, but I thought it was clear from context that, when she was talking about dominating, she was talking about the elite-level bigs, and not just every player in the WNBA that's over X inches tall. Ogwumike canceled out Fowles. She didn't need to cancel out Brunson, Kizer and Faqbenie, because they aren't the same caliber of player. In fact, unless they're being spoon-fed by better talent, Kizer and Faqbenie are pretty much non-entities, at this stage in their respective careers.

Minnesota's larger problem was that Brunson was not able to dominate outplay Carson, on a night where Moore didn't have it; that's why they lost. And the central point remains true: WNBA teams with elite bigs will win more games than they lose. But, when they play against other teams that also have elite bigs, the other stars need to step up. Minnesota's other star is Maya Moore. She didn't step up. So they lost. Saying that "it didn't help" against the Sparks, as if implying that Fowles had something to do with it, is mad specious.



_________________
Professional Hater. The Baron of #HateHard
Michelle89



Joined: 17 Nov 2010
Posts: 15403
Location: Holland


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/26/18 3:23 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Silky Johnson wrote:
bballjunkie wrote:
So 6’2” Nneka cancelled out Brunson 6’2”, Fowles 6’6”, Kizer 6’4”, Fagbenle 6’4”, that Nneka must be simply the best player in the world.


You're being deliberately obtuse right now. Voepel might have mentioned a few role-playing centers in her article, but I thought it was clear from context that, when she was talking about dominating, she was talking about the elite-level bigs, and not just every player in the WNBA that's over X inches tall. Ogwumike canceled out Fowles. She didn't need to cancel out Brunson, Kizer and Faqbenie, because they aren't the same caliber of player. In fact, unless they're being spoon-fed by better talent, Kizer and Faqbenie are pretty much non-entities, at this stage in their respective careers.

Minnesota's larger problem was that Brunson was not able to dominate outplay Carson, on a night where Moore didn't have it; that's why they lost. And the central point remains true: WNBA teams with elite bigs will win more games than they lose. But, when they play against other teams that also have elite bigs, the other stars need to step up. Minnesota's other star is Maya Moore. She didn't step up. So they lost. Saying that "it didn't help" against the Sparks, as if implying that Fowles had something to do with it, is mad specious.


I think they lost because their perimeter players got outplayed by the Sparks perimeter players and Reeve got outcoached by Agler



_________________
"Sue Bird and Lauren Jackson were and are the dynamic duo. They're the one-two punch. They're all the clich�s possible to describe people that perfectly complement each other, who make each other better and also bring out the best in the team." �Karen Bryant


Last edited by Michelle89 on 05/26/18 3:46 pm; edited 1 time in total
Libra_Girl



Joined: 12 Jul 2013
Posts: 1159



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/26/18 3:27 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

bballjunkie wrote:
Except it didn’t help the Lynx against the Sparks. Big girls won’t work on those teams that don’t have any shooters.

Memo to Dallas FO


Michelle89



Joined: 17 Nov 2010
Posts: 15403
Location: Holland


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/26/18 3:45 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

delete



_________________
"Sue Bird and Lauren Jackson were and are the dynamic duo. They're the one-two punch. They're all the clich�s possible to describe people that perfectly complement each other, who make each other better and also bring out the best in the team." �Karen Bryant
bballjunkie



Joined: 12 Aug 2014
Posts: 614



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/26/18 3:58 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

[quote="Silky Johnson"][quote="bballjunkie"]So 6’2” Nneka cancelled out Brunson 6’2”, Fowles 6’6”, Kizer 6’4”, Fagbenle 6’4”, that Nneka must be simply the best player in the world.[/quote]

You're being deliberately obtuse right now. Voepel might have mentioned a few role-playing centers in her article, but I thought it was clear from context that, when she was talking about dominating, she was talking about the elite-level bigs, and not just every player in the WNBA that's over X inches tall. Ogwumike canceled out Fowles. She didn't need to cancel out Brunson, Kizer and Faqbenie, because they aren't the same caliber of player. In fact, unless they're being spoon-fed by better talent, Kizer and Faqbenie are pretty much non-entities, at this stage in their respective careers.

Minnesota's larger problem was that Brunson was not able to dominate outplay Carson, on a night where Moore didn't have it; that's why they lost. And the central point remains true: WNBA teams with elite bigs will win more games than they lose. But, when they play against other teams that also have elite bigs, the other stars need to step up. Minnesota's other star is Maya Moore. She didn't step up. So they lost. Saying that "it didn't help" against the Sparks, as if implying that Fowles had something to do with it, is mad specious.[/quote]

You could have saved yourself the 2 paragraphs, I was responding to your shooting comment. IMO a big is not as advantageous without shooting. Should have added the Shawshank obtuse quote but whatevs.


bballjunkie



Joined: 12 Aug 2014
Posts: 614



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/26/18 4:01 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

[quote="Libra_Girl"][quote="bballjunkie"]Except it didn’t help the Lynx against the Sparks. Big girls won’t work on those teams that don’t have any shooters.[/quote]
Memo to Dallas FO[/quote]

Can you imagine how easy it would be with shooting.


Randy



Joined: 08 Oct 2011
Posts: 8566



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/26/18 4:46 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Of all the explanations I've read about why the Lynx lost to the Sparks (here and elsewhere) I think Spacejunkies explanation is my favorite and makes the most sense.


justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 7053
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/26/18 5:23 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Michelle89 wrote:
I think they lost because their perimeter players got outplayed by the Sparks perimeter players and Reeve got outcoached by Agler

I am not sure where these "hot takes" are coming from. The reason the Lynx lost that game is clear as day: they had 24 damn turnovers. All around sloppy play did them in.

I mean, 24 turnovers and it still took a circus shot at the buzzer to beat them...not exactly a sign of them being "outcoached" or any of the other supposed "reasons". It also means that it is a bad game to look at as far as dominating bigs. A team turns over the ball that much and there is little else that can be concluded from that game.



_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
Michelle89



Joined: 17 Nov 2010
Posts: 15403
Location: Holland


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/26/18 5:39 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

justintyme wrote:
Michelle89 wrote:
I think they lost because their perimeter players got outplayed by the Sparks perimeter players and Reeve got outcoached by Agler

I am not sure where these "hot takes" are coming from. The reason the Lynx lost that game is clear as day: they had 24 damn turnovers. All around sloppy play did them in.

I mean, 24 turnovers and it still took a circus shot at the buzzer to beat them...not exactly a sign of them being "outcoached" or any of the other supposed "reasons". It also means that it is a bad game to look at as far as dominating bigs. A team turns over the ball that much and there is little else that can be concluded from that game.


Sims and Gray outplayed the Lynx perimeter players, the Sparks scored most of their points in the paint while being severly undersized and the Lynx couldnt take advantage of them being undersized. I call that outcoached by Agler (he had a gameplan an it worked and Reeve couldnt adjust) and outplayed by Gray and Sims. But you can think whatever you want Wink



_________________
"Sue Bird and Lauren Jackson were and are the dynamic duo. They're the one-two punch. They're all the clich�s possible to describe people that perfectly complement each other, who make each other better and also bring out the best in the team." �Karen Bryant
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 7053
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/26/18 6:17 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Michelle89 wrote:
justintyme wrote:
Michelle89 wrote:
I think they lost because their perimeter players got outplayed by the Sparks perimeter players and Reeve got outcoached by Agler

I am not sure where these "hot takes" are coming from. The reason the Lynx lost that game is clear as day: they had 24 damn turnovers. All around sloppy play did them in.

I mean, 24 turnovers and it still took a circus shot at the buzzer to beat them...not exactly a sign of them being "outcoached" or any of the other supposed "reasons". It also means that it is a bad game to look at as far as dominating bigs. A team turns over the ball that much and there is little else that can be concluded from that game.


Sims and Gray outplayed the Lynx perimeter players, the Sparks scored most of their points in the paint while being severly undersized and the Lynx couldnt take advantage of them being undersized. I call that outcoached by Agler (he had a gameplan an it worked and Reeve couldnt adjust) and outplayed by Gray and Sims. But you can think whatever you want Wink

I think we watched different games. The Lynx did not play bad defense. They were hardly being scored on in droves. The Lynx shot 50% to the Sparks 40%. They out rebounded the Sparks 41 to 25.

The problem was that they had 18 more turnovers than the Sparks. This led to the Sparks taking 72 shots to the Lynx 55 (17 more shots). Even out those shots and the Lynx win in a blowout. It's really hard to blame anything else other than sloppy play and turnovers for the loss. (BTW, the supposedly "outplayed" Whalen scored 17 points and had 9 assists, while shooting 62%. The Sparks guards shot in the low 40s. Yes they scored more, but again, 17 more shots).



_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
Silky Johnson



Joined: 29 Sep 2014
Posts: 895



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/28/18 8:40 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

bballjunkie wrote:
You could have saved yourself the 2 paragraphs, I was responding to your shooting comment. IMO a big is not as advantageous without shooting. Should have added the Shawshank obtuse quote but whatevs.


Wait, my shooting comment? Which one was that?



_________________
Professional Hater. The Baron of #HateHard
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