- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 26,062
- Reaction Score
- 70,716
Peck seems to be convinced that EDD is the player that Phoenix wants.
Yes, but Peck is an idiot.
Peck seems to be convinced that EDD is the player that Phoenix wants.
Defensively EDD is definitely a PF in the WNBA. She's not gong to be able to defend WNBA wings. And offensively she plays much more like a stretch 4 than any kind of SF.
Probably never will (I mean in her playing days). Don't think she can do much about it now. She made her bed, she has to lie in it. Just the way it is. Probably by the time she is done playing, people won't wonder.When in your opinion will she be able to shake off these questions? I swear I'm not being snarky, I honestly want to know what she would have to do for this reputation to wear off. She's been committed to basketball for the last 3 years, so it seems like she's all in.
Thank you. Your compliment came on the same day I got my first 2012 request to speak at one of the schools for Veterans Day.
Permit a digression. Last year, when I spoke at a middle school, a girl (about 7th grade?) asked, "What was your immediate reaction when you got wounded?"
I have a policy of never telling personal "war stories" but she knew I had a Purple Heart, so I simply drew on my vast experience on the Boneyard to provide a response suitable for the audience and free of dramatics. I answered: "Let's say it was not an LOL moment -- definitely an OMG moment." The kids understood that. (For high school kids I may have said it was a WTF moment. Maybe, maybe not.)
to see Cappy and Vaughn go flat in the second half.I'd like to know DT's opinion. I wish she would tweet.
Probably never will (I mean in her playing days). Don't think she can do much about it now. She made her bed, she has to lie in it. Just the way it is. Probably by the time she is done playing, people won't wonder.
She can use her size to mask lack of foot speed at the 3 (e.g., Mike Dunleavy). She cannot defend the stronger power forwards in the WNBA.
If healthy, Phoenix might have a chance to run the table...
Prahalis (maybe upgrade at PG?), Taurasi, Taylor, Bonner, and Griner with Houston/etc. off the bench is just ridiculous.
She's going to a whole lot more problems staying with perimeter players than dealing with stronger power forwards. Her length doesn't only help her on the perimeter. Dunleavy moves better than Elena does, but he also learned to defend perimeter players at the lower levels including college. The only position Elena has defended is the post, and in terms of size she's relatively bigger than Dunleavy. Dirk is a much better comparison both for her style of play, and her size and strength. Like Dirk she'll play the 4 and still be able to use her length as one of the tallest 4's in the league even if she is out muscled at times.
Well that's not how it happened. She made a commitment to basketball and then to UCONN. Then she backed out of her commitment to UCONN and then backed out of her commitment to basketball. Then she decided she wanted to play again. She may or may not be actually questioned, but people will wonder. And if you are making an economic investment in her, you should.So because she didn't play basketball for one year, she will be questioned about her commitment to basketball after let's say 10 years of actually playing?
Not true. Most college players, don't de-commit from a college and walk away from the game, and take up another sport. In fact, I doubt very few do that.She's played the college game like any other draftee
Exactly, but we don't know for sure. And with good reason. Exactly what I said. See, you got it, you just didn't realize you got it.She may not have been committed to UConn basketball but it looks as though she's still committed to the game overall.
Not true. Most college players, don't de-commit from a college and walk away from the game, and take up another sport. In fact, I doubt very few do that.
Exactly, but we don't know for sure. And with good reason. Exactly what I said. See, you got it, you just didn't realize you got it.
You can if you want, but Simm's situation and EDD's situation were different.So after 3 years, should we all be questioning Odyssey Sims' commitment to Baylor and wondering about a transfer to a different school because she initially decommitted?
I explained that to you. It's not about her playing time at Delaware (or USA basketball).How is that not true?
Which doesn't have anything to do with why people might be cautious with her.I'm saying that she will have the same amount of college experience as other draft picks, if not more if you factor in USA Basketball.
You are changing your tune now. But your first (true) instincts showed through in your initial post. It's ok, it's in the back of your head like most people. It's natural. Don't feel bad.She IS committed to the game and I don't question her dedication to playing in the WNBA. So I don't "get it."
You are changing your tune now. But your first (true) instincts showed through in your initial post. It's ok, it's in the back of your head like most people. It's natural. Don't feel bad.
Well it doesn't really take any psychoanalysis to know what you originally said, and how that is different than what you said subsequent. Since you seem to like psychoanalysis, we'll call it a Freudian Slip, huh?We're doing psychoanalysis over the computer now? Your analysis is incorrect but the attempt was admirable![]()

Yes, and that's different from your initial post. You don't need to feel bad about originally thinking she may not be completely trust worthy in her commitments. Like I said when people do what she has done, though we see not all players do that, it gives people pause. Even yourself. Until brought to your attention. And then it doesn't quite fit with what you want as your perceived perception, so you have to change your tune. But like I said, you don't need to feel bad about that, it's natural.I know how I feel about the situation and already explained it. I think she's committed to basketball. Why would I need to feel bad about that?
Well it doesn't really take any psychoanalysis to know what you originally said, and how that is different than what you said subsequent. Since you seem to like psychoanalysis, we'll call it a Freudian Slip, huh?
Yes, and that's different from your initial post. You don't need to feel bad about originally thinking she may not be completely trust worthy in her commitments. Like I said when people do what she has done, though we see not all players do that, it gives people pause. Even yourself. Until brought to your attention. And then it doesn't quite fit with what you want as your perceived perception, so you have to change your tune. But like I said, you don't need to feel bad about that, it's natural.
From what was reported, she did not want to play basketball. In fact the basketball coach made it a priority not to talk to her about basketball. It wasn't the transfer that kept her from playing.EDD walk away from basketball for a year. Uconn allowed her to transfer to Delaware and play volleyball but she was not allowed to play basketball that transfer year. The following year she began her basketball career at Delaware.
I think my argument was according to her she didn't leave for her sister, but because she was burned out, as I think it was reported. Really I think the point was her stories didn't coincide with what was really happening. i.e it really was about her sister.Last spring, you consistently indicated that you didn't believe that she left UConn because of her sister, and your reasoning was "that's not how it was presented at the time." I think you have the natural instinct of being unwilling to re-examine your initial assumptions and views, even when presented with new facts. Years later, you are still fighting the "When she was 17, she didn't say she was leaving because her sister, so she must be untrustworthy" battle.
Well that would be natural. However, it's usually because the facts are not new, but rather I had already thought through that scenario (not talking about EDD specifically here).I think you have the natural instinct of being unwilling to re-examine your initial assumptions and views, even when presented with new facts.
No not really. More to do with committing and decommitting and walking away from basketball. And not as a general untrustworthiness, but specifically when having to do with major life changes that would affect her sister.Years later, you are still fighting the "When she was 17, she didn't say she was leaving because her sister, so she must be untrustworthy" battle.
Agreed. And I think a GM would want to have this discussion with her. How all that will work.EDD had a unique situation that she was not prepared to handle. She apparently had not taken into consideration how greatly it would impact her.
She is now a grown woman who has had four years to inventory her life and I'm sure she will be more comfortable with being away from her family and I suspect that she has already planned how she will incorporate traveling back to see her family into her life in a new city.
Not sure if she has done that yet, where there would be no doubt.I understand why some will question her ability to leave her comfort zone but I think she has paid her dues when it comes to that decision of a 17 year old girl. She deserves the benefit of the doubt at this point.
Let's hope so.Whichever team gets EDD will be getting a player that will give back to the community and make it a better place than before she arrived. She is a fine young woman who appears to have a much broader perspective on life than the typical college senior.
Agreed. And I think a GM would want to have this discussion with her. How all that will work.
Not sure if she has done that yet, where there would be no doubt.
Let's hope so.
Don't know anyone who is judging her.I'm not saying "no doubt" but just that it may be time to stop judging her on the act of a 17-year-old. If we were all judge at 22 on something that we did at 17 we would all have been carrying around an unfair label.
Don't know anyone who is judging her.
Don't know anyone who is judging her.