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

2021 WNBA Mock Draft
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 46, 47, 48 ... 51, 52, 53  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » WNBA
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
bbsamjj



Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 95



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/06/21 12:30 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Interested in why you see Renia Davis falling so far in the "real" draft? I could see her helping both Atlanta (SF backup) and Indiana.

An Aari McDonald/Kelsey Mitchell backcourt in Indiana is intriguing.


J-Spoon



Joined: 31 Jan 2009
Posts: 6073



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/06/21 12:41 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Stormeo I definitely like your "should" draft more than your "Will" draft

just curious you have Onyenwere lower than I see her (sort of your unexpected falling player" related to my other recent post. Why do you have her below Dungee and Guirantes, not criticizing just curious. I would be thrilled for NY to pick her up in the 2nd round. I would even consider her the first round even though she may be a little redundant with what we have. (I actually think she is better than some of our sophomores). I am kind of making my peace with Walker as a likely pick for NY as I believe she fits both need and what the Liberty are trying to do so I would be happy with that pick. I honestly have been warming up to the Evans idea as well, but she seems like even less of the a need than Onyenwere when you consider Evans would be playing either 1 or 2 where we already have Ionescu, Clarendon, Whitcomb and Jones as options with Durr and Johannes in the as future options.


Stormeo



Joined: 14 Jul 2019
Posts: 2686
Location: Seattle, WA


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/06/21 1:58 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

bbsamjj wrote:
Interested in why you see Rennia Davis falling so far in the "real" draft? I could see her helping both Atlanta (SF backup) and Indiana.


J-Spoon wrote:
just curious you have Onyenwere lower than I see her (sort of your unexpected falling player" related to my other recent post. Why do you have her below Dungee and Guirantes, not criticizing just curious.


To kill two birds in one stone here: In the real draft, while it may not necessarily be Davis or Onyenwere, I do think like last year's Draft, a few unlucky players out of nowhere will end up slipping. While we've known that Davis is a legit prospect for a while now, it just seems like all the guards have been getting more attention as this past college season has progressed (particularly the small guards), so I do think there's a chance that it causes those prospects to perhaps get overdrafted and other good (maybe even better) ones to fall. I have a feeling the Hype Factor is gonna play a big part in this Draft, with all the prospects at/around the same talent level.



_________________
"It's not a game of 'how to', it's a game of 'when to.'" –Sue Bird, on basketball but probably also life
root_thing



Joined: 28 Apr 2007
Posts: 6370
Location: Underground


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/06/21 2:00 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

J-Spoon wrote:

Top 3 might fall
Mack (we see her as a lottery pick but I could see her old school post game maybe lead to a slight fall, end of first round instead of lottery while someone like Walker might jump ahead of her in the post big board)


Mack doesn't get enough credit for all her defensive activity. Along with 4 blocks per game, she also averaged 2 steals and created many more turnovers (credited to her teammates) by knocking down passes or tipping them. As far as offense goes, yes Natasha lacks moves around the basket that will allow her to beat pro defenders on post-ups. Nonetheless, she did put up 19.8 ppg this season. It's not like you can just ignore Mack on offense. She'll score off put-backs, make the occasional midrange jumper, and also run the floor on fastbreaks. Natasha won't be an offensive star, but she can at least pull her weight.



_________________
Aside from separately going on trial for murder and treason, Aaron Burr seemed like a pretty nice guy.
J-Spoon



Joined: 31 Jan 2009
Posts: 6073



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/06/21 2:14 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

root_thing wrote:
J-Spoon wrote:

Top 3 might fall
Mack (we see her as a lottery pick but I could see her old school post game maybe lead to a slight fall, end of first round instead of lottery while someone like Walker might jump ahead of her in the post big board)


Mack doesn't get enough credit for all her defensive activity. Along with 4 blocks per game, she also averaged 2 steals and created many more turnovers (credited to her teammates) by knocking down passes or tipping them. As far as offense goes, yes Natasha lacks moves around the basket that will allow her to beat pro defenders on post-ups. Nonetheless, she did put up 19.8 ppg this season. It's not like you can just ignore Mack on offense. She'll score off put-backs, make the occasional midrange jumper, and also run the floor on fastbreaks. Natasha won't be an offensive star, but she can at least pull her weight.


And just for clarity I am not saying she should fall but

I do think she could.

I will be very interested if it gets to pick 6 and both Mack and Walker are still there who NY picks

(Assuming they pick a post at all which seems like the most obvious need)


Milks26



Joined: 25 Mar 2021
Posts: 116



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/06/21 2:15 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

root_thing wrote:
J-Spoon wrote:

Top 3 might fall
Mack (we see her as a lottery pick but I could see her old school post game maybe lead to a slight fall, end of first round instead of lottery while someone like Walker might jump ahead of her in the post big board)


Mack doesn't get enough credit for all her defensive activity. Along with 4 blocks per game, she also averaged 2 steals and created many more turnovers (credited to her teammates) by knocking down passes or tipping them. As far as offense goes, yes Natasha lacks moves around the basket that will allow her to beat pro defenders on post-ups. Nonetheless, she did put up 19.8 ppg this season. It's not like you can just ignore Mack on offense. She'll score off put-backs, make the occasional midrange jumper, and also run the floor on fastbreaks. Natasha won't be an offensive star, but she can at least pull her weight.


If her draft team use her well Mack will prosper in the W. Hope the Wings are looking at her. She's had better games than Collier this past season.



_________________
~Dallas Wings 2021 Draft (feeling this) Kuier, Davis, Mack
root_thing



Joined: 28 Apr 2007
Posts: 6370
Location: Underground


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/06/21 2:21 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Stormeo wrote:

To kill two birds in one stone here: In the real draft, while it may not necessarily be Davis or Onyenwere, I do think like last year's Draft, a few unlucky players out of nowhere will end up slipping. While we've known that Davis is a legit prospect for a while now, it just seems like all the guards have been getting more attention as this past college season has progressed (particularly the small guards), so I do think there's a chance that it causes those prospects to perhaps get overdrafted and other good (maybe even better) ones to fall. I have a feeling the Hype Factor is gonna play a big part in this Draft, with all the prospects at/around the same talent level.


I see a lot of the same things, but draw the opposite conclusion. Precisely because there are so many small guards -- most of them getting hype -- that I think they're most likely to slide. All the noise is going to cancel itself out and then you're left with a glut undersized players. How many teams are dying to have one? Davis will be coveted because she is unique. At 6-2, Rennia can legitimately play both wing positions and be tall at either spot. And despite being skinny, she has a nose for the ball and finds a way to grab rebounds. That might allow her to play 4 in small line-ups. I just think Rennia has too much value as a multi-position option to slide much past the middle of the 1st Round.



_________________
Aside from separately going on trial for murder and treason, Aaron Burr seemed like a pretty nice guy.
WNBA 09



Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 10352
Location: Dallas , Texas


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/06/21 2:24 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

root_thing wrote:
J-Spoon wrote:

Top 3 might fall
Mack (we see her as a lottery pick but I could see her old school post game maybe lead to a slight fall, end of first round instead of lottery while someone like Walker might jump ahead of her in the post big board)


Mack doesn't get enough credit for all her defensive activity. Along with 4 blocks per game, she also averaged 2 steals and created many more turnovers (credited to her teammates) by knocking down passes or tipping them. As far as offense goes, yes Natasha lacks moves around the basket that will allow her to beat pro defenders on post-ups. Nonetheless, she did put up 19.8 ppg this season. It's not like you can just ignore Mack on offense. She'll score off put-backs, make the occasional midrange jumper, and also run the floor on fastbreaks. Natasha won't be an offensive star, but she can at least pull her weight.


And a perfect fit to play with Arike.



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



Joined: 31 Jan 2009
Posts: 6073



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/06/21 2:26 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

root_thing wrote:
Stormeo wrote:

To kill two birds in one stone here: In the real draft, while it may not necessarily be Davis or Onyenwere, I do think like last year's Draft, a few unlucky players out of nowhere will end up slipping. While we've known that Davis is a legit prospect for a while now, it just seems like all the guards have been getting more attention as this past college season has progressed (particularly the small guards), so I do think there's a chance that it causes those prospects to perhaps get overdrafted and other good (maybe even better) ones to fall. I have a feeling the Hype Factor is gonna play a big part in this Draft, with all the prospects at/around the same talent level.


I see a lot of the same things, but draw the opposite conclusion. Precisely because there are so many small guards -- most of them getting hype -- that I think they're most likely to slide. All the noise is going to cancel itself out and then you're left with a glut undersized players. How many teams are dying to have one? Davis will be coveted because she is unique. At 6-2, Rennia can legitimately play both wing positions and be tall at either spot. And despite being skinny, she has a nose for the ball and finds a way to grab rebounds. That might allow her to play 4 in small line-ups. I just think Rennia has too much value as a multi-position option to slide much past the middle of the 1st Round.


I think both Atl and Indy need a large wing so Davis falling out of the lottery would shock me. I could see both teams think long and hard about McDonald and Evans but both teams already have ball dominant guards on the small side, and neither has an athletic small forward with size. With that said I wouldn't be too shocked if Atl or Indy did take McDonald or Evans because of their higher profile so in short I agree with both of you


root_thing



Joined: 28 Apr 2007
Posts: 6370
Location: Underground


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/06/21 2:40 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

J-Spoon wrote:

I will be very interested if it gets to pick 6 and both Mack and Walker are still there who NY picks

(Assuming they pick a post at all which seems like the most obvious need)


Kolb said we shouldn't expect NY to draft for need. He said something about being forward thinking and taking "the player who is best for us." That sounds like a convoluted way of saying they're going for the best player available. Or maybe they're setting us up for a deferral pick. For what it's worth, Paul Nilsen the supposed international expert listed Rupert ahead of Kuier. Anyway, I'm going to immunize myself from disappointment by assuming some type of worst case scenario -- like the Liberty drafting Flo Chagas.



_________________
Aside from separately going on trial for murder and treason, Aaron Burr seemed like a pretty nice guy.
Richyyy



Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 22889
Location: London


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/06/21 2:44 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I can absolutely see teams/GMs falling in love with the size and potential of Davis if everything were to work out right with her, but from the games I saw I'd be sorely tempted to take Onyenwere ahead of her. You worry about the shooting range and whether she's a 3 or a 4, but she's consistently active and makes things happen. I didn't see many Tennessee games, but the ones that I did there were too many times where I was searching to find whether Davis was on the court.

The numbers suggest it's basically a toss-up, but my personal eye-test favoured Onyenwere. (all of which is pretty irrelevant to the discussion of whether they go above or below the small guards - sorry!)



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



Joined: 31 Jan 2009
Posts: 6073



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/06/21 2:54 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

root_thing wrote:
J-Spoon wrote:

I will be very interested if it gets to pick 6 and both Mack and Walker are still there who NY picks

(Assuming they pick a post at all which seems like the most obvious need)


Kolb said we shouldn't expect NY to draft for need. He said something about being forward thinking and taking "the player who is best for us." That sounds like a convoluted way of saying they're going for the best player available. Or maybe they're setting us up for a deferral pick. For what it's worth, Paul Nilsen the supposed international expert listed Rupert ahead of Kuier. Anyway, I'm going to immunize myself from disappointment by assuming some type of worst case scenario -- like the Liberty drafting Flo Chagas.


I can definitely see Rupert as a deferral as an option

If we assume Han and Johannes are out for the year and that NY is going to pay Durr and keep her in a roster spot (maybe there is even still some hope that her recovery will continue and she could at least practice with the team or maybe even get some court time later in the season) than there is only one spot left, and there would now be enough money freed up to pay R. Allen so there is simply no room for the #6 pick so deferring would make a lot of sense under that scenario.


J-Spoon



Joined: 31 Jan 2009
Posts: 6073



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/06/21 2:56 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Richyyy wrote:
I can absolutely see teams/GMs falling in love with the size and potential of Davis if everything were to work out right with her, but from the games I saw I'd be sorely tempted to take Onyenwere ahead of her. You worry about the shooting range and whether she's a 3 or a 4, but she's consistently active and makes things happen. I didn't see many Tennessee games, but the ones that I did there were too many times where I was searching to find whether Davis was on the court.

The numbers suggest it's basically a toss-up, but my personal eye-test favoured Onyenwere. (all of which is pretty irrelevant to the discussion of whether they go above or below the small guards - sorry!)


And this brings me back to my question to Stormeo (and others) about why Onyenwere is getting consistently ranked lower than Davis, Dungee and Guirantes. I think all of those players are good, but I am more drawn to Onyenwere than the other three. She has more "it" factor IMO.


WNBA 09



Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 10352
Location: Dallas , Texas


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/06/21 2:58 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

J-Spoon wrote:
Richyyy wrote:
I can absolutely see teams/GMs falling in love with the size and potential of Davis if everything were to work out right with her, but from the games I saw I'd be sorely tempted to take Onyenwere ahead of her. You worry about the shooting range and whether she's a 3 or a 4, but she's consistently active and makes things happen. I didn't see many Tennessee games, but the ones that I did there were too many times where I was searching to find whether Davis was on the court.

The numbers suggest it's basically a toss-up, but my personal eye-test favoured Onyenwere. (all of which is pretty irrelevant to the discussion of whether they go above or below the small guards - sorry!)


And this brings me back to my question to Stormeo (and others) about why Onyenwere is getting consistently ranked lower than Davis, Dungee and Guirantes. I think all of those players are good, but I am more drawn to Onyenwere than the other three. She has more "it" factor IMO.


She relishes in the paint and shes undersized. That's her knock , her range is limited and she wont be able to dominate the low block the way she did at UCLA in the pro's . (Yet to be seen) But overall if Onyenwere were closer to 6'4 versus 5"11 I would definitely see her as lottery worthy.



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



Joined: 18 Feb 2021
Posts: 36
Location: Oklahoma


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/06/21 3:16 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

root_thing wrote:
J-Spoon wrote:

Top 3 might fall
Mack (we see her as a lottery pick but I could see her old school post game maybe lead to a slight fall, end of first round instead of lottery while someone like Walker might jump ahead of her in the post big board)


Mack doesn't get enough credit for all her defensive activity. Along with 4 blocks per game, she also averaged 2 steals and created many more turnovers (credited to her teammates) by knocking down passes or tipping them. As far as offense goes, yes Natasha lacks moves around the basket that will allow her to beat pro defenders on post-ups. Nonetheless, she did put up 19.8 ppg this season. It's not like you can just ignore Mack on offense. She'll score off put-backs, make the occasional midrange jumper, and also run the floor on fastbreaks. Natasha won't be an offensive star, but she can at least pull her weight.


I think the knock on Mack's offense comes from the fact that she couldn't score against future WNBA posts during her career(With the exception of Collier). She also misses a bunch of easy shots when she goes right in the paint. Her jump shot is going to struggle greater in the league because it is such a slow release. She can't dribble the ball, which limits her even more. She also struggled rebounding and blocking shots against other elite post players(again, exception being Collier). She has a great deal of upside, but the present looks bleak considering the size and athletic ability of the majority of the competition she faced this year.

As an OK State fan, I'll be rooting for her to make needed changes, and hope she gets put in the best position to succeed. Dallas, Indiana, or the Aces(if theyre willing to make a trade up) would be best case scenarios imo



_________________
okstateguy
WNBA 09



Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 10352
Location: Dallas , Texas


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/06/21 3:40 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I think Mack will excel once the game starts to slow down for her at the next level.



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



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 28333



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/06/21 4:04 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

WNBA 09 wrote:
J-Spoon wrote:
Richyyy wrote:
I can absolutely see teams/GMs falling in love with the size and potential of Davis if everything were to work out right with her, but from the games I saw I'd be sorely tempted to take Onyenwere ahead of her. You worry about the shooting range and whether she's a 3 or a 4, but she's consistently active and makes things happen. I didn't see many Tennessee games, but the ones that I did there were too many times where I was searching to find whether Davis was on the court.

The numbers suggest it's basically a toss-up, but my personal eye-test favoured Onyenwere. (all of which is pretty irrelevant to the discussion of whether they go above or below the small guards - sorry!)


And this brings me back to my question to Stormeo (and others) about why Onyenwere is getting consistently ranked lower than Davis, Dungee and Guirantes. I think all of those players are good, but I am more drawn to Onyenwere than the other three. She has more "it" factor IMO.


She relishes in the paint and shes undersized. That's her knock , her range is limited and she wont be able to dominate the low block the way she did at UCLA in the pro's . (Yet to be seen) But overall if Onyenwere were closer to 6'4 versus 5"11 I would definitely see her as lottery worthy.


She has amazing athleticism and quicks. I liken her to a whirling dervish in the lane. And the ability to stop and pop from midrange. I've heard she has a great work ethic. Onyenwere has as mentioned above a certain 'it'. I think where she lands will determine her longer term success. I's always tricky with a tweener. She has clearly worked on and improved her three shooting. She shoots a lot of FTs and at a good percentage so those are both good signs.


WNBA 09



Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 10352
Location: Dallas , Texas


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/06/21 4:11 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

myrtle wrote:
WNBA 09 wrote:
J-Spoon wrote:
Richyyy wrote:
I can absolutely see teams/GMs falling in love with the size and potential of Davis if everything were to work out right with her, but from the games I saw I'd be sorely tempted to take Onyenwere ahead of her. You worry about the shooting range and whether she's a 3 or a 4, but she's consistently active and makes things happen. I didn't see many Tennessee games, but the ones that I did there were too many times where I was searching to find whether Davis was on the court.

The numbers suggest it's basically a toss-up, but my personal eye-test favoured Onyenwere. (all of which is pretty irrelevant to the discussion of whether they go above or below the small guards - sorry!)


And this brings me back to my question to Stormeo (and others) about why Onyenwere is getting consistently ranked lower than Davis, Dungee and Guirantes. I think all of those players are good, but I am more drawn to Onyenwere than the other three. She has more "it" factor IMO.


She relishes in the paint and shes undersized. That's her knock , her range is limited and she wont be able to dominate the low block the way she did at UCLA in the pro's . (Yet to be seen) But overall if Onyenwere were closer to 6'4 versus 5"11 I would definitely see her as lottery worthy.


She has amazing athleticism and quicks. I liken her to a whirling dervish in the lane. And the ability to stop and pop from midrange. I've heard she has a great work ethic. Onyenwere has as mentioned above a certain 'it'. I think where she lands will determine her longer term success. I's always tricky with a tweener. She has clearly worked on and improved her three shooting. She shoots a lot of FTs and at a good percentage so those are both good signs.


I like Onyenwere in LA , she can learn from a player like Nneka with the same drive and smaller size sample on the low block . She reminds me a lot of Nneka now that I think of it , just Way smaller. High End Nneka Low End : Anriel Howard



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



Joined: 28 Apr 2007
Posts: 6370
Location: Underground


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/06/21 4:57 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

okstateguy wrote:

She also misses a bunch of easy shots when she goes right in the paint. Her jump shot is going to struggle greater in the league because it is such a slow release. She can't dribble the ball, which limits her even more. She also struggled rebounding and blocking shots against other elite post players(again, exception being Collier).


From what I saw this season, missing layups in women's college basketball was a disease almost as scary as COVID. But you watched more OK St games than I did, so I'll defer to your opinion. I will note, however, that Mack never had a bad scoring game and a bad rebounding game simultaneously -- at least not based on the numbers. And elite post players rarely get their shots blocked by anyone. The point of rim protectors is to help out against guards driving down the lane. As far as her slow release jump-shot goes, I'm assuming Mack will only take it when wide-open.



_________________
Aside from separately going on trial for murder and treason, Aaron Burr seemed like a pretty nice guy.
Richyyy



Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 22889
Location: London


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/06/21 5:17 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

root_thing wrote:
From what I saw this season, missing layups in women's college basketball was a disease almost as scary as COVID.

And so many players who can't use their left hands - including making a left-handed layup - to save their freaking lives. Shockingly regular weakness, even among top prospects.



_________________
Independent WNBA coverage: http://www.wnbalien.com/
Rock Hard



Joined: 02 Aug 2010
Posts: 4025
Location: Chocolate Paradise


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/06/21 5:17 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Coach Wade's perspective is totally opposite of mine. If Mack were to fall down in draft I would draft her without hesitation. I would use my second round pick on any point guard that can chew gum and walk at the same time. I would have a competition between Mack and N'dor for the last post spot on the roster. No one needs to over think this draft. Just draft some players and let nature dictate the outcome. Like people on this board has been saying for months, its a mediocre draft.



_________________
I am .... a bucket.
WNBA 09



Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 10352
Location: Dallas , Texas


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/06/21 5:21 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Richyyy wrote:
root_thing wrote:
From what I saw this season, missing layups in women's college basketball was a disease almost as scary as COVID.

And so many players who can't use their left hands - including making a left-handed layup - to save their freaking lives. Shockingly regular weakness, even among top prospects.


Along with so many travel's and carry's the rust was #Real



_________________
3-Time WNBA Champion-3-Time National Champion-4-Time Olympic Champion....And Yes DT "We Got Confeti" lol
Milks26



Joined: 25 Mar 2021
Posts: 116



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/06/21 5:37 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

https://winsidr.com/2021/04/five-players-whose-wnba-stock-changed-during-the-ncaa-tournament/



_________________
~Dallas Wings 2021 Draft (feeling this) Kuier, Davis, Mack
Stormeo



Joined: 14 Jul 2019
Posts: 2686
Location: Seattle, WA


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/06/21 8:13 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

J-Spoon wrote:
And this brings me back to my question to Stormeo (and others) about why Onyenwere is getting consistently ranked lower than Davis, Dungee and Guirantes. I think all of those players are good, but I am more drawn to Onyenwere than the other three. She has more "it" factor IMO.


Here are the question marks I have about Onyenwere:

First, while she has gotten more comfortable out on the perimeter because UCLA went to a more 5-out style of playing this past season, she still got many of her points by posting others up. At not-even-6'0, that part of her game may get taken away from her in the W, going up against players either bigger/taller or quicker/craftier than her (or all of the above). She is still in danger of being a tweener imo.

Second, her best season was either her sophomore or junior year – not this one, as one would think it'd be for someone who's pegged as having a lot of upside. Her FG% got worse between her junior season & this past season by a good 4 % points – even though her 3PT% itself improved. Speaking of which, if you take away that one game where she went 6-6 from 3 (which is good in & of itself), it drops her from 33% to 26%. So I'm not convinced her 3PT shooting has actually improved – though I don't think players under Cori Close get their shooting developed much, so perhaps a new coach would work wonders for Onyenwere. And while it's true she had less talent around her this past season (less players in general, really) which might explain the lower shooting numbers, her rebounding numbers also dropped slightly.

Finally, on top of her individual concerns as a prospect, Onyenwere imo is prone to getting underdrafted simply because she & UCLA had very little buzz about them the whole season (other than their lack of bodies), and then proceeded to have an earlier-than-anticipated Tourney exit. Like I said before, I think the Hype Factor may play into this Draft quite a bit.



_________________
"It's not a game of 'how to', it's a game of 'when to.'" –Sue Bird, on basketball but probably also life
Stormeo



Joined: 14 Jul 2019
Posts: 2686
Location: Seattle, WA


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/07/21 12:17 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Milks26 wrote:
https://winsidr.com/2021/04/five-players-whose-wnba-stock-changed-during-the-ncaa-tournament/


Quote:
Charli Collier, Texas
Stock: Down


Ya have to wonder if GMs would agree with that assessment on her. We've discussed Collier at length, but we all still have basically penciled her in at or just about at the top despite acknowledging her flaws & the bad games she has had this season. This Draft would get even more interesting if her hometown team passed on her for both Top-2 picks and she ended up slipping...



_________________
"It's not a game of 'how to', it's a game of 'when to.'" –Sue Bird, on basketball but probably also life
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » WNBA All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 46, 47, 48 ... 51, 52, 53  Next
Page 47 of 53

 
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