| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
shontay33
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 471
Back to top |
 Posted: 08/14/18 12:41 pm ::: |
Reply  |
|
| calbearman76 wrote: |
I disagree. First there are 12 teams. If you want to make a real change how about restricting the playoffs to just the top 2 or at most the top 4 teams. If a team finishes 5th they don't really even deserve 1 playoff game. But even if you are going to have a playoff system that includes 8 teams how do you suggest fitting in 2 of 3 series for the first two rounds. Shorten the regular season to 28 games? Use 2 of 3 series for the whole playoffs and go back to 1 vs. 8, 2 vs. 7, etc. The playoff system has been created because of limitations placed on the League by outside forces.
If you want a system that determines the best team, do away with the playoffs completely. Get rid of 1 team, extend the season to 40 games and play 4 games against every other team. Best record is champion. Of course then you wouldn't have the relatively higher ratings that the playoffs bring. |
Keep playoff format as is. Forty games compacted is too much on the players and would bring down the product. The underdog always has a chance. Also, just because you have the best record,does not mean anything. The Warriors had the best record and loss in the finals after the Cavs came back from being down 3 to 1.
|
|
Force10rulz
Joined: 11 Apr 2009
Posts: 1966
Location: Puget Sound
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/14/18 3:10 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| I’m fine with it, since we don’t get the have a conference finals we might as well get a bye from the first round.
_________________
Seattle Storm 3 times Champions
|
|
calbearman76
Joined: 02 Nov 2009
Posts: 5155
Location: Carson City
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/14/18 3:22 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| shontay33 wrote: |
| calbearman76 wrote: |
I disagree. First there are 12 teams. If you want to make a real change how about restricting the playoffs to just the top 2 or at most the top 4 teams. If a team finishes 5th they don't really even deserve 1 playoff game. But even if you are going to have a playoff system that includes 8 teams how do you suggest fitting in 2 of 3 series for the first two rounds. Shorten the regular season to 28 games? Use 2 of 3 series for the whole playoffs and go back to 1 vs. 8, 2 vs. 7, etc. The playoff system has been created because of limitations placed on the League by outside forces.
If you want a system that determines the best team, do away with the playoffs completely. Get rid of 1 team, extend the season to 40 games and play 4 games against every other team. Best record is champion. Of course then you wouldn't have the relatively higher ratings that the playoffs bring. |
Keep playoff format as is. Forty games compacted is too much on the players and would bring down the product. The underdog always has a chance. Also, just because you have the best record,does not mean anything. The Warriors had the best record and loss in the finals after the Cavs came back from being down 3 to 1. |
You miss my point. 40 games would not mean a compacted schedule; there would be an additional 4 weeks (now used for the playoffs) so the season could be more spread out. As for your NBA analogy, that just supports my point. The Warriors demonstrated they were the best team throughout the season, even if they didn't win the Championship.
That doesn't mean I am against the inherent drama of a playoff system. The reason why March Madness has become so big is because it is all drama. The winner is not necessarily the best team so much as it is the last team standing.
Consider it from a statistical standpoint. Team A plays Team B. Team A wins 60% of the time, and is therefore the better team. If the teams play a 1 game playoff Team A will win 60% of the time. If they play a 3 game playoff, A wins 65%. 5 games raises the chances to 68%, 7 games is 71%. If Team A wins 2/3 of the games, the percentages go up more dramatically: 1 game (67%), 3 games (74%), 5 games (79%), 7 games (83%).
|
|
shontay33
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 471
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/14/18 5:10 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| calbearman76 wrote: |
| shontay33 wrote: |
| calbearman76 wrote: |
I disagree. First there are 12 teams. If you want to make a real change how about restricting the playoffs to just the top 2 or at most the top 4 teams. If a team finishes 5th they don't really even deserve 1 playoff game. But even if you are going to have a playoff system that includes 8 teams how do you suggest fitting in 2 of 3 series for the first two rounds. Shorten the regular season to 28 games? Use 2 of 3 series for the whole playoffs and go back to 1 vs. 8, 2 vs. 7, etc. The playoff system has been created because of limitations placed on the League by outside forces.
If you want a system that determines the best team, do away with the playoffs completely. Get rid of 1 team, extend the season to 40 games and play 4 games against every other team. Best record is champion. Of course then you wouldn't have the relatively higher ratings that the playoffs bring. |
Keep playoff format as is. Forty games compacted is too much on the players and would bring down the product. The underdog always has a chance. Also, just because you have the best record,does not mean anything. The Warriors had the best record and loss in the finals after the Cavs came back from being down 3 to 1. |
You miss my point. 40 games would not mean a compacted schedule; there would be an additional 4 weeks (now used for the playoffs) so the season could be more spread out. As for your NBA analogy, that just supports my point. The Warriors demonstrated they were the best team throughout the season, even if they didn't win the Championship.
That doesn't mean I am against the inherent drama of a playoff system. The reason why March Madness has become so big is because it is all drama. The winner is not necessarily the best team so much as it is the last team standing.
Consider it from a statistical standpoint. Team A plays Team B. Team A wins 60% of the time, and is therefore the better team. If the teams play a 1 game playoff Team A will win 60% of the time. If they play a 3 game playoff, A wins 65%. 5 games raises the chances to 68%, 7 games is 71%. If Team A wins 2/3 of the games, the percentages go up more dramatically: 1 game (67%), 3 games (74%), 5 games (79%), 7 games (83%). |
Lets just say that they increase the games to 40. Then that means that the players would have to not play overseas because the season would either have to start in March or end completely in October or November. That means that is cutting into the players overseas season. I don't think the teams will be okay with that. That will also make players even more late for training camp. Also, the NCAA final 4 is a the beginning of April. That would mean that the draft would have to be the week before or week of the final 4 and the rookies would have to report to camp at the latest the second week of April. The main thing is finding the space to play games. Some of the WNBA teams play in NBA arenas and preseason begins in October which would cause a scheduling conflict.
As far as your reference go pertaining to percentages, I see your point but the Warriors had the best record in the NBA. That means nothing in the post season. All teams in the playoffs are 0-0. The only reason the regular season matters is because of seeding.
|
|
Richyyy
Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 24351
Location: London
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/14/18 5:25 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| shontay33 wrote: |
| calbearman76 wrote: |
| shontay33 wrote: |
| calbearman76 wrote: |
I disagree. First there are 12 teams. If you want to make a real change how about restricting the playoffs to just the top 2 or at most the top 4 teams. If a team finishes 5th they don't really even deserve 1 playoff game. But even if you are going to have a playoff system that includes 8 teams how do you suggest fitting in 2 of 3 series for the first two rounds. Shorten the regular season to 28 games? Use 2 of 3 series for the whole playoffs and go back to 1 vs. 8, 2 vs. 7, etc. The playoff system has been created because of limitations placed on the League by outside forces.
If you want a system that determines the best team, do away with the playoffs completely. Get rid of 1 team, extend the season to 40 games and play 4 games against every other team. Best record is champion. Of course then you wouldn't have the relatively higher ratings that the playoffs bring. |
Keep playoff format as is. Forty games compacted is too much on the players and would bring down the product. The underdog always has a chance. Also, just because you have the best record,does not mean anything. The Warriors had the best record and loss in the finals after the Cavs came back from being down 3 to 1. |
You miss my point. 40 games would not mean a compacted schedule; there would be an additional 4 weeks (now used for the playoffs) so the season could be more spread out. As for your NBA analogy, that just supports my point. The Warriors demonstrated they were the best team throughout the season, even if they didn't win the Championship.
That doesn't mean I am against the inherent drama of a playoff system. The reason why March Madness has become so big is because it is all drama. The winner is not necessarily the best team so much as it is the last team standing.
Consider it from a statistical standpoint. Team A plays Team B. Team A wins 60% of the time, and is therefore the better team. If the teams play a 1 game playoff Team A will win 60% of the time. If they play a 3 game playoff, A wins 65%. 5 games raises the chances to 68%, 7 games is 71%. If Team A wins 2/3 of the games, the percentages go up more dramatically: 1 game (67%), 3 games (74%), 5 games (79%), 7 games (83%). |
Lets just say that they increase the games to 40. Then that means that the players would have to not play overseas because the season would either have to start in March or end completely in October or November. That means that is cutting into the players overseas season. I don't think the teams will be okay with that. That will also make players even more late for training camp. Also, the NCAA final 4 is a the beginning of April. That would mean that the draft would have to be the week before or week of the final 4 and the rookies would have to report to camp at the latest the second week of April. The main thing is finding the space to play games. Some of the WNBA teams play in NBA arenas and preseason begins in October which would cause a scheduling conflict.
As far as your reference go pertaining to percentages, I see your point but the Warriors had the best record in the NBA. That means nothing in the post season. All teams in the playoffs are 0-0. The only reason the regular season matters is because of seeding. |
If you actually read what he's saying, he's saying they could dump the playoffs entirely and have the title decided as a pure league, like, say, the Englsh Premier League soccer title. That's where the time for the extra six games would come from.
There's no way on Earth that that happens, of course. There would be so many meaningless games by around midseason once virtually nothing mattered outside of the top few teams. Plus US sport is just conditioned towards playoffs at this point. Good luck with a system where the season just ends. |
|
shontay33
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 471
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/14/18 5:43 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Richyyy wrote: |
| shontay33 wrote: |
| calbearman76 wrote: |
| shontay33 wrote: |
| calbearman76 wrote: |
I disagree. First there are 12 teams. If you want to make a real change how about restricting the playoffs to just the top 2 or at most the top 4 teams. If a team finishes 5th they don't really even deserve 1 playoff game. But even if you are going to have a playoff system that includes 8 teams how do you suggest fitting in 2 of 3 series for the first two rounds. Shorten the regular season to 28 games? Use 2 of 3 series for the whole playoffs and go back to 1 vs. 8, 2 vs. 7, etc. The playoff system has been created because of limitations placed on the League by outside forces.
If you want a system that determines the best team, do away with the playoffs completely. Get rid of 1 team, extend the season to 40 games and play 4 games against every other team. Best record is champion. Of course then you wouldn't have the relatively higher ratings that the playoffs bring. |
Keep playoff format as is. Forty games compacted is too much on the players and would bring down the product. The underdog always has a chance. Also, just because you have the best record,does not mean anything. The Warriors had the best record and loss in the finals after the Cavs came back from being down 3 to 1. |
You miss my point. 40 games would not mean a compacted schedule; there would be an additional 4 weeks (now used for the playoffs) so the season could be more spread out. As for your NBA analogy, that just supports my point. The Warriors demonstrated they were the best team throughout the season, even if they didn't win the Championship.
That doesn't mean I am against the inherent drama of a playoff system. The reason why March Madness has become so big is because it is all drama. The winner is not necessarily the best team so much as it is the last team standing.
Consider it from a statistical standpoint. Team A plays Team B. Team A wins 60% of the time, and is therefore the better team. If the teams play a 1 game playoff Team A will win 60% of the time. If they play a 3 game playoff, A wins 65%. 5 games raises the chances to 68%, 7 games is 71%. If Team A wins 2/3 of the games, the percentages go up more dramatically: 1 game (67%), 3 games (74%), 5 games (79%), 7 games (83%). |
Lets just say that they increase the games to 40. Then that means that the players would have to not play overseas because the season would either have to start in March or end completely in October or November. That means that is cutting into the players overseas season. I don't think the teams will be okay with that. That will also make players even more late for training camp. Also, the NCAA final 4 is a the beginning of April. That would mean that the draft would have to be the week before or week of the final 4 and the rookies would have to report to camp at the latest the second week of April. The main thing is finding the space to play games. Some of the WNBA teams play in NBA arenas and preseason begins in October which would cause a scheduling conflict.
As far as your reference go pertaining to percentages, I see your point but the Warriors had the best record in the NBA. That means nothing in the post season. All teams in the playoffs are 0-0. The only reason the regular season matters is because of seeding. |
If you actually read what he's saying, he's saying they could dump the playoffs entirely and have the title decided as a pure league, like, say, the Englsh Premier League soccer title. That's where the time for the extra six games would come from.
There's no way on Earth that that happens, of course. There would be so many meaningless games by around midseason once virtually nothing mattered outside of the top few teams. Plus US sport is just conditioned towards playoffs at this point. Good luck with a system where the season just ends. |
I did read what he said. But I also gave points as to why I felt that the format should stay the same and not just hand the championship to the regular season winner. Which is why I brought up the point about the
Warriors having the best record during the regular season and loosing the championship.
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66910
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/29/18 4:16 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| One of the major reasons for the change in the playoff format & making the first two rounds single elimination was so ESPN would air all of the playoff games. So naturally, ESPN is relegating semifinal games to ESPN News...
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
mercfan3
Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 19760
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/29/18 4:27 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| pilight wrote: |
| One of the major reasons for the change in the playoff format & making the first two rounds single elimination was so ESPN would air all of the playoff games. So naturally, ESPN is relegating semifinal games to ESPN News... |
Taurasi has trended on Twitter for this past game, and the CT game.
She’s entertaining and marketable. A very very easy sell.
The Atlanta/Washington series has been fantastic basketball so far.
So we have a Friday game on ESPN news?
It’s kind of interesting that Kobe and Lebron market the WNBA better than ESPN does.
_________________
“Anyone point out that a Donald Trump anagram is ‘Lord Dampnut’”- Colin Mochrie
|
|
WNBA 09
Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 12536
Location: Dallas , Texas
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/29/18 4:46 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| pilight wrote: |
| One of the major reasons for the change in the playoff format & making the first two rounds single elimination was so ESPN would air all of the playoff games. So naturally, ESPN is relegating semifinal games to ESPN News... |
Shady ASF .
_________________
3-Time WNBA Champion-3-Time National Champion-4-Time Olympic Champion....And Yes DT "We Got Confeti" lol
|
|
WNBA 09
Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 12536
Location: Dallas , Texas
Back to top |
|
willtalk
Joined: 13 Apr 2012
Posts: 1094
Location: NorCal
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/29/18 7:45 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Why not have seven teams and only give the top team a first round bye. In fact why should any teams have any bye's at all? The NBA does not giver their top teams/team any bye. They just play the lowest rated team. There is nothing wrong with just using the regular season to establish the seeding and for home game advantage during the playoffs.
I could understand that in the past they used that format to make sure that certain teams which had TV drawing power were assured of getting in the finals. It this season results are based on parity and not just on weird scheduling than that should not be as big a problem as it might have been in the past.
The NBA format has proven to work for them, so why shouldn't it be good enough for the WNBA.
I would also agree about back to backs. It isn't just the back to backs but having the back to back during a series of multiple road games makes it worse. I also remember there were time early in the season when some teams had almost a week between games. This makes no sense. To have long stretches when no games are played and then to bunch them together at another point in the season. If they truly were pressed to get enough games in a short period of time this type of scheduling should not happen.
It appears at first glance that the people running the WNBA are not the sharpest tools in the shed.
|
|
willtalk
Joined: 13 Apr 2012
Posts: 1094
Location: NorCal
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/29/18 7:45 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Why not have seven teams and only give the top team a first round bye. In fact why should any teams have any bye's at all? The NBA does not giver their top teams/team any bye. They just play the lowest rated team. There is nothing wrong with just using the regular season to establish the seeding and for home game advantage during the playoffs.
I could understand that in the past they used that format to make sure that certain teams which had TV drawing power were assured of getting in the finals. It this season results are based on parity and not just on weird scheduling than that should not be as big a problem as it might have been in the past.
The NBA format has proven to work for them, so why shouldn't it be good enough for the WNBA.
I would also agree about back to backs. It isn't just the back to backs but having the back to back during a series of multiple road games makes it worse. I also remember there were time early in the season when some teams had almost a week between games. This makes no sense. To have long stretches when no games are played and then to bunch them together at another point in the season. If they truly were pressed to get enough games in a short period of time this type of scheduling should not happen.
It appears at first glance that the people running the WNBA are not the sharpest tools in the shed.
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11148
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/30/18 10:22 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| willtalk wrote: |
Why not have seven teams and only give the top team a first round bye. In fact why should any teams have any bye's at all? The NBA does not giver their top teams/team any bye. They just play the lowest rated team. There is nothing wrong with just using the regular season to establish the seeding and for home game advantage during the playoffs.
I could understand that in the past they used that format to make sure that certain teams which had TV drawing power were assured of getting in the finals. It this season results are based on parity and not just on weird scheduling than that should not be as big a problem as it might have been in the past.
The NBA format has proven to work for them, so why shouldn't it be good enough for the WNBA.
I would also agree about back to backs. It isn't just the back to backs but having the back to back during a series of multiple road games makes it worse. I also remember there were time early in the season when some teams had almost a week between games. This makes no sense. To have long stretches when no games are played and then to bunch them together at another point in the season. If they truly were pressed to get enough games in a short period of time this type of scheduling should not happen.
It appears at first glance that the people running the WNBA are not the sharpest tools in the shed. |
I think the WNBA owners want to make the playoffs, and a home playoff game generally generates about $10,000 in profit. Not huge, but since most teams struggle, that pays a bill.
The playoff chase this year also kept games interesting until the last day. Without that, who would have cared about or watched Las Vegas and Dallas on the last Friday of the season?
But if you get more teams into the playoffs, you have to fit them in the window available to the league, which is limited on both ends (in the spring by overseas competition and in the fall by international ones).
And I have to say I really enjoyed watching the single-elimination games. Very intense, well-played, and fun. The first games of the best-of-five are more strategic and just not as compelling because it's not winner-take-all.
Of course, everyone would love a 40-game season, higher salaries, expanded playoffs, charter flights, etc., but I'm guessing almost every niche sport and minor league has a similar wish list.
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
Randy
Joined: 08 Oct 2011
Posts: 10911
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/30/18 10:59 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| It's pretty simple - the fans who buy tickets don't really want more playoff games, except for a few perennial contenders. They don't show up well for the first round or two. Owners (probably with the same exceptions) only want the playoffs to keep interest up in the regular season and for marketing benefit. They don't want to book their arena for games that might never happen so the games end up in odd and often out of the way places. Even the Mercury - one of the league leaders in attendance - played their first round game in an alternate arena. So the single games are here to stay until they prove that fans want more.
|
|
lethalweapon3
Joined: 17 May 2018
Posts: 333
Location: ATL ITP, GA
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/30/18 11:00 am ::: |
Reply |
|
I figure elimination is here to stay for the near term. But I'd rather ramp down the stakes for each round, basically making the second round Best of 3. And if the Finals can go 7, that would be fine, too.
1st Round: Winner-Take-All (seeds 5 thru 8 )
2nd Round: Best-of-3 (two 1st round winners plus seeds 3 and 4)
Semis: Best-of-5 (two 2nd round winners plus seeds 1 and 2)
Finals: Best-of-7 (two semis winners)
I think that's like a max of six additional games from what we have now, four if you don't stretch the Finals to 7, and that shouldn't break the piggy bank.
If scheduling becomes a squeeze, back the regular season up to Mother's Day Weekend (incl. Friday and Saturday), and allow the wannabes to get a chance to shine early on before all the players return from overseas.
A little more overthinking... to reduce travel concerns (Seattle-Atlanta or LA-Connecticut going back-and-forth) in early-round play, allow the Round 1 winners to host Game 1 of Round 2, then play Game 2 and the if-necessary Game 3 in the higher-seed's house. Puts a little pressure on the 3 or 4 seed to play well from the jump.
|
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63770
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/30/18 12:41 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
A best of 7 series doesn’t seem too practical. For one thing, 7 games is about the same as 20% of the regular season. The other thing it takes so many days to complete with the travel back and forth and the extra days in between the travel.
There’s nothing wrong with the current system. The teams that earned it are in the semis and they’re both good series.
_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
|
|
mercfan3
Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 19760
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/30/18 2:15 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Why not do
Round 1:
Single elimination
Round 2:
3 game series
Round 3: (semis)
3 game series
Round 4: (finals)
5 game series
It moves from 12 potential games to 13 potential games, which shouldn’t make a difference with television.
Granted, I happen to agree that there isn’t anything wrong with this system . But If we wanted to change it...
_________________
“Anyone point out that a Donald Trump anagram is ‘Lord Dampnut’”- Colin Mochrie
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66910
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/30/18 2:19 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| mercfan3 wrote: |
| The only issue is, with years like this..when the worlds are in September. Or maybe waits does the playoffs after the worlds? |
How would the Merc fair in the playoffs with Griner and taurasi in Russia? That's where they'll be after the worlds.
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63770
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/30/18 2:30 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Wait, you know for sure Taurasi is going back to Russia?
If she does return, she better sign up for the full year, because Maya’s not going back. If Taurasi does a full year in Russia, she’ll come back to the WNBA all pastey and fatigued... not the Taurasi we’re seeing this year. This year she’s just pastey.
_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
|
|
mercfan3
Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 19760
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/30/18 2:41 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Shades wrote: |
Wait, you know for sure Taurasi is going back to Russia?
If she does return, she better sign up for the full year, because Maya’s not going back. If Taurasi does a full year in Russia, she’ll come back to the WNBA all pastey and fatigued... not the Taurasi we’re seeing this year. This year she’s just pastey. |
I would have said DT is for sure not going back to Russia. There was an article about how she’s going to have a family vacation and Spain, and go to some Uconn sporting events this year. Maybe we’ll see her start to explore some promo or other career options (like Skylar does) during the break, too.
Also, she has a son. I’m sure she’d like to just..spend time with her son.
_________________
“Anyone point out that a Donald Trump anagram is ‘Lord Dampnut’”- Colin Mochrie
|
|
scrappy
Joined: 18 May 2006
Posts: 1880
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/30/18 3:50 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| mercfan3 wrote: |
| Shades wrote: |
Wait, you know for sure Taurasi is going back to Russia?
If she does return, she better sign up for the full year, because Maya’s not going back. If Taurasi does a full year in Russia, she’ll come back to the WNBA all pastey and fatigued... not the Taurasi we’re seeing this year. This year she’s just pastey. |
I would have said DT is for sure not going back to Russia. There was an article about how she’s going to have a family vacation and Spain, and go to some Uconn sporting events this year. Maybe we’ll see her start to explore some promo or other career options (like Skylar does) during the break, too.
Also, she has a son. I’m sure she’d like to just..spend time with her son. |
taurasi has a son?  adopted? birth? wow, i have not been keeping up with the sports' current affair. 
_________________
She's blonde, she can block. She is 6 foot five, she can deny. Though she is tall, she definitely can score. ya'al think she is quite nice, but on the court she can put up a fight.
|
|
Michelle89
Joined: 17 Nov 2010
Posts: 16464
Location: Holland
Back to top |
|
scrappy
Joined: 18 May 2006
Posts: 1880
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/30/18 5:09 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Michelle89 wrote: |
| scrappy wrote: |
| mercfan3 wrote: |
| Shades wrote: |
Wait, you know for sure Taurasi is going back to Russia?
If she does return, she better sign up for the full year, because Maya’s not going back. If Taurasi does a full year in Russia, she’ll come back to the WNBA all pastey and fatigued... not the Taurasi we’re seeing this year. This year she’s just pastey. |
I would have said DT is for sure not going back to Russia. There was an article about how she’s going to have a family vacation and Spain, and go to some Uconn sporting events this year. Maybe we’ll see her start to explore some promo or other career options (like Skylar does) during the break, too.
Also, she has a son. I’m sure she’d like to just..spend time with her son. |
taurasi has a son? adopted? birth? wow, i have not been keeping up with the sports' current affair. |
Her wife Penny Taylor gave birth to a son called Leo |
what!? i thought penny taylor has or had a dude? i remember nancy leiberman was joking about what penny brought to america when she was playing for the mercury. her studly dude according to leiberman's words. i'm way off the loop these days.
_________________
She's blonde, she can block. She is 6 foot five, she can deny. Though she is tall, she definitely can score. ya'al think she is quite nice, but on the court she can put up a fight.
|
|
scrappy
Joined: 18 May 2006
Posts: 1880
Back to top |
|
mercfan3
Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 19760
Back to top |
|
|
|
