Athlon 2019/2020 WCBB Pre Season Rankings

[LoTrader]

The gap between Sabrina and Dangerfield is significant, and that is the case with all the NCAA guards/wings when compared to Sabrina. I've not seen Crystal be able to score from anywhere on the floor, against any defense, at anytime, and at will, like Sabrina. Crystal does not rebound like Sabrina. Crystal does not pass like Sabrina. I've said this before, and I am an OSU fan, not a Duck fan, Sabrina's game most resembles Larry Bird's game. She excels at everything, and, has the highest of basketball IQs, and, is fearless. There is not anything this kid doesn't believe she can do, as an individual, or as a teammate. She is a once in a decade player. Crystal is a fantastic player, but she is not in the same league as Sabrina.

 

[Alydar]

In the first place Sabrina is without question the best guard coming into the season. As for pro, she is a 6'er and Dangerfield is 5'5". Their pro prospects are night and day. But this is still college. CD is the primary ball-handler bring the ball over halfcourt. She then becomes one of 5 offensive players who for the most part are all scoring options. Sabrina didn't bring the ball over halfcourt as much last season, leaving it to Cazorla et al. Many possessions she didn't even touch the ball for the 1st half of the possession. But she was the go-to player late in every possession and to her credit she took full advantage to drive to score or drive to dish. In that regard she was like L. Bird as he was in college, except she plays with better players. So comparing Dangerfield and Ionescu isn't a case of like vs like. In fact historically UConn players never lead the country in individual stats except fg%. The depth of talent spreads the stats around. But UConn is historically high up in team stats, at least once leading the country in pts/poss both offensively and defensively.
But before anointing her as a future WNBA star look at those numbers she put up in the biggest game of her life last year against Baylor. 6-24. Baylor decided to let her shoot rather than let her assist and Sabrina had a tough time. Compare that to Stewart, who played her best ball in 4 FF's, against the best competition.
For that alone I chuckle at your Larry Bird comparison. Larry was a winner. Fact. Ionescu may or may not be a winner. She failed in her 1st attempt. Is that harsh? Yeah, but if she is as good as you say it's time to do it on a big stage, away from that ugly floor. (It may look nice in person but on TV it looks like two layers of paint have partially peeled, revealing a third layer).

 

[LoTrader]

In the first place Sabrina is without question the best guard coming into the season. As for pro, she is a 6'er and Dangerfield is 5'5". Their pro prospects are night and day. But this is still college. CD is the primary ball-handler bring the ball over halfcourt. She then becomes one of 5 offensive players who for the most part are all scoring options. Sabrina didn't bring the ball over halfcourt as much last season, leaving it to Cazorla et al. Many possessions she didn't even touch the ball for the 1st half of the possession. But she was the go-to player late in every possession and to her credit she took full advantage to drive to score or drive to dish. In that regard she was like L. Bird as he was in college, except she plays with better players. So comparing Dangerfield and Ionescu isn't a case of like vs like. In fact historically UConn players never lead the country in individual stats except fg%. The depth of talent spreads the stats around. But UConn is historically high up in team stats, at least once leading the country in pts/poss both offensively and defensively.
But before anointing her as a future WNBA star look at those numbers she put up in the biggest game of her life last year against Baylor. 6-24. Baylor decided to let her shoot rather than let her assist and Sabrina had a tough time. Compare that to Stewart, who played her best ball in 4 FF's, against the best competition.
For that alone I chuckle at your Larry Bird comparison. Larry was a winner. Fact. Ionescu may or may not be a winner. She failed in her 1st attempt. Is that harsh? Yeah, but if she is as good as you say it's time to do it on a big stage, away from that ugly floor. (It may look nice in person but on TV it looks like two layers of paint have partially peeled, revealing a third layer).

Looking forward to the UO vs UCONN game. Will reveal all the layers of paint. I am a UCONN fan, and there is no question the quality of players that come from that program, ready to launch in the WNBA.

 

[Alydar]

Looking forward to the UO vs UCONN game. Will reveal all the layers of paint. I am a UCONN fan, and there is no question the quality of players that come from that program, ready to launch in the WNBA.

If UConn were to (unthinkable) change their mascot I nominate the Phoenix. UConn has died several times in the last 20 years, at least according to the media . After Stewart/Tuck/Samuelson left, a funeral was held at ESPN and several fan boards. Going into the NCAA's late that season, surprise surprise surprise, UConn was the #1 team in the country and undefeated. And many future AA's have been dismissed as UConn freshmen. Even Stewart was a disappointment until late in her freshman season. That's one reason I am confident about Williams & ONO.

Who knows? UConn could fall this year. But I'll make book that if that happens it won't fall far and it won't fall for long.

 

[nwhoopfan]

But before anointing her as a future WNBA star look at those numbers she put up in the biggest game of her life last year against Baylor. 6-24.

You can make anybody look bad when you cherry pick stats.

In UConn's loss to Baylor Collier was 6-18, KLS 4-16, and Dangerfield was 4-18. Dangerfield was also 2-11 in the FF loss to Notre Dame.

The previous year Dangerfield was 3-11 in the FF loss to Notre Dame.

 

[Alydar]

You can make anybody look bad when you cherry pick stats.

In UConn's loss to Baylor Collier was 6-18, KLS 4-16, and Dangerfield was 4-18. Dangerfield was also 2-11 in the FF loss to Notre Dame.

The previous year Dangerfield was 3-11 in the FF loss to Notre Dame.

The difference is that I'm not touting any of those players as far away the best of their class. I have doubts as to Dangerfield;s career in the W. Too small. And Collier's fitness to play in the W is no longer in question.

I guess what I disagree about is the certainty that Ionescu is the one. I come from a background of horse racing and if I had a dollar for every article I read touting a "can't lose" horse I'd be typing this from my mountainside home in Maui. Horses that run very fast against mediocre competition often can't run that fast when the class of the competition toughens. Ionescu had her first national "big game" vs Baylor and she was ineffective. I won't be shocked if she is the MOP of the FF. I'll enjoy watching Ionescu and I'll let the season play itself out.

 

[PAC-12HoopFan]

I agree with much of what Alydar writes above about Ionescu. She will face challenges and adversity in adapting to the speed and strength in the WNBA. Her situation in Oregon has e been a near-perfect one for her to shine. She didn't shoot well from the field during her freshman season. Now, her three-point shooting is one of her strengths.

Having seen Ionescu play at the AAU level through her first three years in college, I believe it is her competitiveness, high basketball IQ, and disdain for losing that separates her from the other top guards in the country. Some of that competitiveness and occasional pouting is why she has a number of detractors who don't like how she handles herself on the court. Unless she takes a significant step back during her senior season, she will be drafted #1 overall next April and will quickly be thrust into the fire against stronger and more athletic players. That hasn't prevented her in the past from excelling at a very high level. I expect Ionescu to quickly figure out what she can get away with and can't get away with at the WNBA level. I also expect her to be a challenge for her coaches to manage throughout her professional career. Not all of her teammates at Oregon have enjoyed playing with her. The egos of WNBA players will only tolerate so much from a teammate who can be perceived as being "me first" too much of the time.

 

[nwhoopfan]

The difference is that I'm not touting any of those players as far away the best of their class. I have doubts as to Dangerfield;s career in the W. Too small. And Collier's fitness to play in the W is no longer in question.

I guess what I disagree about is the certainty that Ionescu is the one. I come from a background of horse racing and if I had a dollar for every article I read touting a "can't lose" horse I'd be typing this from my mountainside home in Maui. Horses that run very fast against mediocre competition often can't run that fast when the class of the competition toughens. Ionescu had her first national "big game" vs Baylor and she was ineffective. I won't be shocked if she is the MOP of the FF. I'll enjoy watching Ionescu and I'll let the season play itself out.

I am not a betting man. I leave the horses alone.

I've seen Ionescu have some really bad games, but I've seen her have some huge games, and most of the time she's very impactful. I'm a huge fan of consistency. In my mind Plum's Sr. year is the most consistently excellent I've ever seen anyone play at the college level. Her pro career has left plenty to be desired so far though. We'll have to wait and see w/ Ionescu. I'm not quite sure if she's a generational talent or not, but I definitely expect her to be successful at the next level. She and Oregon have improved each year she's been there, so I wouldn't be surprised to see at least another incremental step forward.

I'm not sure about a semi final being her first national "big game." I think there were plenty of big games prior to that. But if it truly was her first "big game," how about Taurasi's first game at the same stage? I seem to recall it was fairly disastrous. She went on to do okay.

 

[Alydar]

I am not a betting man. I leave the horses alone.

I've seen Ionescu have some really bad games, but I've seen her have some huge games, and most of the time she's very impactful. I'm a huge fan of consistency. In my mind Plum's Sr. year is the most consistently excellent I've ever seen anyone play at the college level. Her pro career has left plenty to be desired so far though. We'll have to wait and see w/ Ionescu. I'm not quite sure if she's a generational talent or not, but I definitely expect her to be successful at the next level. She and Oregon have improved each year she's been there, so I wouldn't be surprised to see at least another incremental step forward.

I'm not sure about a semi final being her first national "big game." I think there were plenty of big games prior to that. But if it truly was her first "big game," how about Taurasi's first game at the same stage? I seem to recall it was fairly disastrous. She went on to do okay.

You have a strong case for Ionescu but you use poor analogies. Taurasi's meltdown came as a freshman. Ionescu folded as a junior. Taurasi re-established her rep by winning the next 3 titles, 2 with her team on her back. This is Ionescu's last shot at her first. And actually I'm only talking about her performance, the win is gravy.

And name a bigger game than a Final Four semi? The only one bigger is the final.

 

[nwhoopfan]

And name a bigger game than a Final Four semi? The only one bigger is the final.

I could be wrong, but I seem to recall Geno talking about how difficult Regional Final games are. Have to win that one to get to the Final 4. Any number of big games during the season that are important to position yourself to get favorable seeding/location in the Tourney.

As far as Taurasi vs. Ionescu, it's really apples and oranges. You are correct that Sabrina had a poor National semi-final game as an upperclassmen while Diana was just a Fr. Their circumstances were very different though, which adds some context to everything. Taurasi joined a team coming off a National Title who returned just about everybody. UConn was in the process of establishing themselves as the top program in women's hoops (Taurasi certainly played a big role in that). Ionescu joined an Oregon program that had been bad for a long time and had virtually no history to speak of. Ionescu leading an Oregon team that had a fairly mediocre season to the Elite 8 her Fr. year has to be considered a significant accomplishment. I'd say their 3rd round win vs. Maryland was definitely a "big game" and Ionescu played very well in that one.

 

[Alydar]

I could be wrong, but I seem to recall Geno talking about how difficult Regional Final games are. Have to win that one to get to the Final 4. Any number of big games during the season that are important to position yourself to get favorable seeding/location in the Tourney.

As far as Taurasi vs. Ionescu, it's really apples and oranges. You are correct that Sabrina had a poor National semi-final game as an upperclassmen while Diana was just a Fr. Their circumstances were very different though, which adds some context to everything. Taurasi joined a team coming off a National Title who returned just about everybody. UConn was in the process of establishing themselves as the top program in women's hoops (Taurasi certainly played a big role in that). Ionescu joined an Oregon program that had been bad for a long time and had virtually no history to speak of. Ionescu leading an Oregon team that had a fairly mediocre season to the Elite 8 her Fr. year has to be considered a significant accomplishment. I'd say their 3rd round win vs. Maryland was definitely a "big game" and Ionescu played very well in that one.

Can't disagree with any of that.

I'm going to be interested in seeing whether ESPN will make her the poster-child this year. You'd figure it would be her or Cox. But then Cox plays for a Fox team and Ionecu who except a couple on ESPN is exclusively on PAC12Network, which plays on Friday night, a traditional NBA night on ESPN. Besides, with a lock on the ACC and SEC I'd guess that ESPN's preseason lists won't be as full of west coasters as these early publications.

 

[nwhoopfan]

I'm going to be interested in seeing whether ESPN will make her the poster-child this year. You'd figure it would be her or Cox. But then Cox plays for a Fox team and Ionecu who except a couple on ESPN is exclusively on PAC12Network, which plays on Friday night, a traditional NBA night on ESPN. Besides, with a lock on the ACC and SEC I'd guess that ESPN's preseason lists won't be as full of west coasters as these early publications.

Interesting. Who does ESPN push if they ignore Ionescu and Cox? Can't think of a returning player in either the SEC or ACC who seems ready made to be a poster child.


edit--oops, I suppose Chennedy Carter would be one such player from the SEC

 

[TheFarmFan]

I don't think I understand what this debate is about. For the season that just ended, Ionescu won the Wade Trophy for national player of the year, the Wooden Award for most outstanding player in WCBB, and the Nancy Lieberman Award for the nation's top point guard (for the second straight year - she also won as a sophomore).

Yet despite all these accolades, and despite having better stats than CD, folks are trying to argue (1) that Ionescu is actually a forward; and (2) it's unclear who's better between Ionescu and CD. I don't get it. I like CD a lot - she's the latest rising senior in a long line of UConn women who are well spoken, humble, driven, and do everything the right way. CD is also definitely among the top PGs in the country. But it's comical to argue that Ionescu is neither a PG nor the top PG in the country.

It's beginning to make me think folks are just jealous that for once someone else has the fanciest pony in the stable. (To beat the horse metaphor to death a bit more.) Players come, players go, you always have Geno. I suggest taking a deep breath and enjoying the senior season of the most luminescent player in WCBB since Stewwie. And then next season you'll have her again in the form of one Bueckers, P.

ETA: Also, some of the fact assertions here are just bizarre. For example:

I agree with much of what Alydar writes above about Ionescu. . . . She didn't shoot well from the field during her freshman season. Now, her three-point shooting is one of her strengths.

Ionescu shot .420 from long range her freshman year, and .429 this past junior year. So .420 is "didn't shoot well from the field" but .429 is "one of her strengths"??? BTW, CD's 3pt% was .352 last year. So does that make her the stinker of all of WCBB if she's .07 below "didn't shoot well"? Personally, I don't think so, but if that's the metric we're assigning, then CD is even more mediocre than freshman year Sabrina apparently was.

 

[PAC-12HoopFan]

ETA: Also, some of the fact assertions here are just bizarre. For example:
Ionescu shot .420 from long range her freshman year, and .429 this past junior year. So .420 is "didn't shoot well from the field" but .429 is "one of her strengths"??? BTW, CD's 3pt% was .352 last year. So does that make her the stinker of all of WCBB if she's .07 below "didn't shoot well"? Personally, I don't think so, but if that's the metric we're assigning, then CD is even more mediocre than freshman year Sabrina apparently was.

I should have been more specific. Ionescu shot 39% overall from the field during her freshman season at Oregon. I should have not have transitioned in commenting on her three-point accuracy. Ionescu was more effective from behind the arc as a frosh than she was shooting two-pointers. Ionescu has been a very accurate free throw shooter and three-point shooter throughout her three seasons in Eugene. She struggled inside the arc from the field as a frosh.

 

[MilfordHusky]

Sabrina is a great player who is very good at most things. What makes her stand out is the combo of points, rebounds, and assists. She has the court vision to drop dimes and the height to grab rebounds. I don’t view her as a traditional point guard, but she is very good at what she does. It appears that she will tie Sue Bird with 3 Lieberman Awards. Her legacy will be greatly enhanced if Oregon can win the National Championship. I still have questions about her foot speed at the next level, but I think she’ll be a star, regardless.

 

[Alydar]

I don't think I understand what this debate is about. For the season that just ended, Ionescu won the Wade Trophy for national player of the year, the Wooden Award for most outstanding player in WCBB, and the Nancy Lieberman Award for the nation's top point guard (for the second straight year - she also won as a sophomore).

Yet despite all these accolades, and despite having better stats than CD, folks are trying to argue (1) that Ionescu is actually a forward; and (2) it's unclear who's better between Ionescu and CD. I don't get it. I like CD a lot - she's the latest rising senior in a long line of UConn women who are well spoken, humble, driven, and do everything the right way. CD is also definitely among the top PGs in the country. But it's comical to argue that Ionescu is neither a PG nor the top PG in the country.

It's beginning to make me think folks are just jealous that for once someone else has the fanciest pony in the stable. (To beat the horse metaphor to death a bit more.) Players come, players go, you always have Geno. I suggest taking a deep breath and enjoying the senior season of the most luminescent player in WCBB since Stewwie. And then next season you'll have her again in the form of one Bueckers, P.

ETA: Also, some of the fact assertions here are just bizarre. For example:


Ionescu shot .420 from long range her freshman year, and .429 this past junior year. So .420 is "didn't shoot well from the field" but .429 is "one of her strengths"??? BTW, CD's 3pt% was .352 last year. So does that make her the stinker of all of WCBB if she's .07 below "didn't shoot well"? Personally, I don't think so, but if that's the metric we're assigning, then CD is even more mediocre than freshman year Sabrina apparently was.

In trying to find facts to support my POV I came across the criteria for the Wade Trophy. Individual stats are not among the factors for the prize? It's team stats.

The Wade Trophy Committee selects the recipient. Selection is based on team statistics, improvement from year-to-year and contribution to the team and the community. The Wade Trophy

Granted you win any individual numbers discussion. But as you see individual numbers are NOT a factor in the Wade Trophy (which surprised me). So the WBCA says pooh pooh to your numbers. LOL Just kidding.
As a UConn fan I've learned to not expect any UConn players to lead the country in scoring or assists. Why? Not because they lack the talent, but because nobody dominates offense at UConn like Ionescu does at Oregon or like others have done elsewhere, except maybe for a game. The UConn system spreads the scoring out and from game to game they find who is hot that night. Take a look at Taurasi's career numbers. She averaged 15pts; 4.5 boards and 4.5 assists. Using your measuring stick she shouldn't have even been in the discussion for POY, ever. And others felt that way too in 2004, awarding the POY to Beard. She had the numbers, playing on the right team. But most would agree in hindsight that UConn still had the best player. Taurasi dragged a young and inexperienced UConn team to the title in both 2003 & 2004, averaging 18 & 16 pts/gm.
I also remember enjoying watching McCaughtry play for Louisville. She wasn't the point guard but she still dominated the offense, even more so in late game situations when her alter-ego would come out and she would become a one-person offense. No UConn player came near to her numbers in her last 3 years. In the 2009 she was the No 1 pick. But it was Maya Moore, who never averaged 20/gm in any of her college years who won POY, doing it all 3 times she was eligible. Now some will say it's because of UConn bias. (Is that jealousy? LOL) But my point is that numbers , while a useful tool, are also a function of the system the player is in. Sabrina is in a perfect situation to shine. And I'm glad she is because Oregon is one of the most entertaining teams to watch in college.

 

[triaddukefan]

Guess I'll have to go to the grocery store to find out the rest of the rankings . I'll report back soon. Until then, carry on.

 

[PAC-12HoopFan]

Guess I'll have to go to the grocery store to find out the rest of the rankings . I'll report back soon. Until then, carry on.

Don't spend the $10.99 plus tax like I did for the four pages of women's coverage. There are 208 total pages in his year's edition, including the four pages devoted (?) to covering the women's game. In addition to the first six teams identified in the first post of this thread before that poster lost interest, the rest of the rankings are as follows:

7) Oregon State
8) Syracuse
9) NC State
10) Notre Dame
11) Kentucky
12) South Carolina
13) Miami
14) Florida State
15) Michigan
16) UCLA
17) Michigan State
18) Louisville
19) Iowa State
20) Mississippi State
21) Iowa
22) BYU
23) West Virginia
24) Gonzaga
25) South Dakota State

 

[donalddoowop]

Don't spend the $10.99 plus tax like I did for the four pages of women's coverage. There are 208 total pages in his year's edition, including the four pages devoted (?) to covering the women's game. In addition to the first six teams identified in the first post of this thread before that poster lost interest, the rest of the rankings are as follows:

7) Oregon State
8) Syracuse
9) NC State
10) Notre Dame
11) Kentucky
12) South Carolina
13) Miami
14) Florida State
15) Michigan
16) UCLA
17) Michigan State
18) Louisville
19) Iowa State
20) Mississippi State
21) Iowa
22) BYU
23) West Virginia
24) Gonzaga
25) South Dakota State

If you read my post you will see that I did not lose interest. I was in a grocery store and I did not have the paper to record the rest of the teams and I was not going to buy the book for the reason you stated.

 

[triaddukefan]

Don't spend the $10.99 plus tax like I did for the four pages of women's coverage. There are 208 total pages in his year's edition, including the four pages devoted (?) to covering the women's game. In addition to the first six teams identified in the first post of this thread before that poster lost interest, the rest of the rankings are as follows:

Thanks. My plan was to just take pics of the pertinent pages with my cell phone. I wasnt going to spend the money, but my gosh ... $10.99 .

 

[donalddoowop]

Thanks. My plan was to just take pics of the pertinent pages with my cell phone. I wasnt going to spend the money, but my gosh ... $10.99 .

Lindy Sports is out now and UConn is ranked ninth. I did not check the price but I know it was more than I wanted to pay. They even had a very short write up on my St. Louis Billikens men's team. Not worth it.

 

[JonathanXIV]

Lindy Sports is out now and UConn is ranked ninth. I did not check the price but I know it was more than I wanted to pay. They even had a very short write up on my St. Louis Billikens men's team. Not worth it.

Ninth?! I think that tells you all you need to know about that publication.

 

[Tonyc]

Fake News LOL Lindy has just lost alot of readers. With Westbrook UConn is the team to beat.