Candace Parker/Olympic team thread (merged threads)

[Paesano]

Personally, I don't care if it was Geno who decided to keep her off the team or not. I also don't care if her stats indicate she is one of the 12 best players or not. The 12 most talented players don't necessarily make the best team. Geno doesn't always recruit the best high school players because he doesn't think they are always a good fit with his style or the team in general. So, maybe Geno did provide an opinion that she be left off the team. Maybe he doesn't think she is a good fit. Maybe it is technical in nature, maybe it is personal. Don't care. He was selected to coach the team for a reason. He is a genius. Tough crap if his decision upsets Tennessee fans or some super fans who THINK they know better.

 

[Goodgood]

Personally, I don't care if it was Geno who decided to keep her off the team or not. I also don't care if her stats indicate she is one of the 12 best players or not. The 12 most talented players don't necessarily make the best team. Geno doesn't always recruit the best high school players because he doesn't think they are always a good fit with his style or the team in general. So, maybe Geno did provide an opinion that she be left off the team. Maybe he doesn't think she is a good fit. Maybe it is technical in nature, maybe it is personal. Don't care. He was selected to coach the team for a reason. He is a genius. Tough crap if his decision upsets Tennessee fans or some super fans who THINK they know better.

Somebody will come by and say that we are basketball fans and the discussion is fun. Ad nauseam. Horse it dead.

 

[hoophuskee]

Hoophuskee - Parker has only 'averaged' 6.3 assists per game for the last 16 games she has played. That is a pretty small sample size - for her career she averages 3.6 assist per game with 2.6 TOs per game for a 1.4 A/TO ratio. The half year she played last year was impressive, and she has been improving her assists while keeping her TOs under control in the last three years, but at the moment 6.3 is a completely aberrational number. We'll see if she can maintain a number anywhere close to that for a full 30 game season. I disagree that she has a better handle on the perimeter than Moore and she certainly isn't a better jump shooter, but she is a better finisher at the rim than Moore which is what I said.

I don't believe there is a number that ED/Maya or Cacthigns or any other would-be PF could get in that 16 game tiem-span. I think a lot of it had to do with a terrific new coach in Brain Agler. Plus-- even if I look at after the 2012 Olympics, parkers numbers of assists tto turnovers are superior to Moore, EDD and Catchings. Far superior to EDD and Catchings. That's the point though - she excels at an area which is a basic fundamental and overall she is an outstanding player - thus imo she belongs. They are all outstanding but in my view and as many others she is more outstanding than most. SO I would like an explanation. They don't have to give ti to me. But I don't have to like it that they aren't giving it to me.

And I fully expect - Just in one close game - even if it is somewhat close- a comment by an announcer will be brought up- "Where is Candace Parker?" We saw what happened when that moron from Mass spoke. Doesn't evne follow the game - can care less about it - and he's talking about what its good for. Unreal!!

 

[hoophuskee]

Personally, I don't care if it was Geno who decided to keep her off the team or not. I also don't care if her stats indicate she is one of the 12 best players or not. The 12 most talented players don't necessarily make the best team. Geno doesn't always recruit the best high school players because he doesn't think they are always a good fit with his style or the team in general. So, maybe Geno did provide an opinion that she be left off the team. Maybe he doesn't think she is a good fit. Maybe it is technical in nature, maybe it is personal. Don't care. He was selected to coach the team for a reason. He is a genius. Tough crap if his decision upsets Tennessee fans or some super fans who THINK they know better.

As good says- some of us do care and are interested in why. In this case - don't take offense- I don't care about your opinion that you don't care.

The point is some of us, many overall, do believe that she is a good fit for the team. These boards are here for those type of discussions. If this thread isn't one you enjoy - well then . . .

 

[UcMiami]

On the last three teams Candice Dupree has payed 15 games and started five of them - Candace Parker has played in 8 games and started 3 of them - Doesn't Candice Dupree deserve an explanation? She has won just as many gold medals with team USA NT as Parker has, and was in the last NT and has been much more integral to the three Geno coached teams than Candace has. And if Candice Dupree deserves an explanation doesn't Nneka and Odyssey who were also displaced from the last NT?

And the committee is not a unified vote - if we are to believe rumors the final vote was 2-3 against Candace - so do you need to know why each person voted the way they did, and doesn't that involve answering which players might have been involved in a series of 2-3 votes against Parker and who voted which way on each of those votes and why? For each answer the committee gives, there will be another set of questions that 'deserve to be answered'. Who knows, maybe there were three other players that also lost on 2-3 votes for inclusion and maybe Candace was't the 'last' of those votes.

Everybody seems to think Candace is the superstar of the USA NT, but she isn't even a starter on the team and never has been, and she has only played in 8 of the last 23 games the team has played. That is like saying Gabby was the superstar of Uconn's team this past year. She is a 'superstar' personality and she is a great player in the WNBA but on the USA NT she has always been just another player off the bench. Sometimes she has contributed a lot and sometimes she hasn't and with a team like the USA NT (like with Uconn) which usually wins by 30+ points, accumulating the best stats in a competition does not equate to being important in the one or two close games the team plays.

Finally being available most of the time even when the brightest lights aren't on is a very important quality for the USA committee and since her inclusion in her first NT team in 2006, she has been unavailable 40% of the time which is a higher rate than anyone else who has come onto a USA team from 2002 through 2012. Availability: Sue and Tamika 2002 100%/86%, Diana 2004 100%, Fowles 2008 75%, Moore, Whalen, Charles, and McCaughtry 2010 100% vs. Parker 2006 60%.

And yes USA basketball stated a very true fact - there are three completely healthy USA NT veterans in the pool who were left off this team and they are all forwards Nneka, Dupree, and Parker; the fourth veteran left off this team is Sims who is only just now getting cleared to play basketball after injury and is a guard. So when they say the strength of the USA pool is at forward they are stating a fact that is pretty demonstrably correct. Does it tell you much about how each of the five committee members view the forwards on the team - no, and it wasn't meant to.

 

[bbsamjj]

I would (assume and hope) they have all been given some type of explanation privately.

 

[hoophuskee]

On the last three teams Candice Dupree has payed 15 games and started five of them - Candace Parker has played in 8 games and started 3 of them - Doesn't Candice Dupree deserve an explanation? She has won just as many gold medals with team USA NT as Parker has, and was in the last NT and has been much more integral to the three Geno coached teams than Candace has. And if Candice Dupree deserves an explanation doesn't Nneka and Odyssey who were also displaced from the last NT?

And the committee is not a unified vote - if we are to believe rumors the final vote was 2-3 against Candace - so do you need to know why each person voted the way they did, and doesn't that involve answering which players might have been involved in a series of 2-3 votes against Parker and who voted which way on each of those votes and why? For each answer the committee gives, there will be another set of questions that 'deserve to be answered'. Who knows, maybe there were three other players that also lost on 2-3 votes for inclusion and maybe Candace was't the 'last' of those votes.

Everybody seems to think Candace is the superstar of the USA NT, but she isn't even a starter on the team and never has been, and she has only played in 8 of the last 23 games the team has played. That is like saying Gabby was the superstar of Uconn's team this past year. She is a 'superstar' personality and she is a great player in the WNBA but on the USA NT she has always been just another player off the bench. Sometimes she has contributed a lot and sometimes she hasn't and with a team like the USA NT (like with Uconn) which usually wins by 30+ points, accumulating the best stats in a competition does not equate to being important in the one or two close games the team plays.

Finally being available most of the time even when the brightest lights aren't on is a very important quality for the USA committee and since her inclusion in her first NT team in 2006, she has been unavailable 40% of the time which is a higher rate than anyone else who has come onto a USA team from 2002 through 2012. Availability: Sue and Tamika 2002 100%/86%, Diana 2004 100%, Fowles 2008 75%, Moore, Whalen, Charles, and McCaughtry 2010 100% vs. Parker 2006 60%.

And yes USA basketball stated a very true fact - there are three completely healthy USA NT veterans in the pool who were left off this team and they are all forwards Nneka, Dupree, and Parker; the fourth veteran left off this team is Sims who is only just now getting cleared to play basketball after injury and is a guard. So when they say the strength of the USA pool is at forward they are stating a fact that is pretty demonstrably correct. Does it tell you much about how each of the five committee members view the forwards on the team - no, and it wasn't meant to.

No she doesn't deserve an explanation. Parker is universally accepted as a top 5 world player talent. Just because many UCONN fans may not care for Parker doesn't mean she isn't as well regarded. You don't see media like Voepel in support of Dupree but you do with Parker. Nor do you hear from her Phoenix coach saying it is mind-boggling like you hear from Agler. Nor do you hear from former all-time great players like Tina Thompson. Or Magic Johnson. Or some of the players. Who is clamoring for Dupree? There is a reason. Parker is a beast and has a specific unique skill set that is superior to someone like Dupree.

Just want more than the standard BS- "We have so many 3/4's>" Well Parker is regarded as arguably a world's best. Why doesn't her game fit if she is such a better passer? Just as coco said- tell me.

 

[Paesano]

As good says- some of us do care and are interested in why. In this case - don't take offense- I don't care about your opinion that you don't care.

The point is some of us, many overall, do believe that she is a good fit for the team. These boards are here for those type of discussions. If this thread isn't one you enjoy - well then . . .

No offense taken. I also don't care that you care so we are even. And I will let you in on a little secret. Neither does Geno. Nor does it matter that you think she is a good fit because you are not, you know, the coach. I will put my trust in the hall of fame coach with 11 rings to know better than you do. Again, no offense. I mean, after all, the man is a genius as a coach.

 

[Icebear]

No she doesn't deserve an explanation. Parker is universally accepted as a top 5 world player talent. Just because many UCONN fans may not care for Parker doesn't mean she isn't as well regarded. You don't see media like Voepel in support of Dupree but you do with Parker. Nor do you hear from her Phoenix coach saying it is mind-boggling like you hear from Agler. Nor do you hear from former all-time great players like Tina Thompson. Or Magic Johnson. Or some of the players. Who is clamoring for Dupree? There is a reason. Parker is a beast and has a specific unique skill set that is superior to someone like Dupree.

Just want more than the standard BS- "We have so many 3/4's>" Well Parker is regarded as arguably a world's best. Why doesn't her game fit if she is such a better passer? Just as coco said- tell me.

Except that looking at the statistics showed that she really wasn't a runaway over either EDD and Catchings and that there were legitimate arguments to be made for them over her.

 

[UcMiami]

No she doesn't deserve an explanation. Parker is universally accepted as a top 5 world player talent. Just because many UCONN fans may not care for Parker doesn't mean she isn't as well regarded. You don't see media like Voepel in support of Dupree but you do with Parker. Nor do you hear from her Phoenix coach saying it is mind-boggling like you hear from Agler. Nor do you hear from former all-time great players like Tina Thompson. Or Magic Johnson. Or some of the players. Who is clamoring for Dupree? There is a reason. Parker is a beast and has a specific unique skill set that is superior to someone like Dupree.

Just want more than the standard BS- "We have so many 3/4's>" Well Parker is regarded as arguably a world's best. Why doesn't her game fit if she is such a better passer? Just as coco said- tell me.

In the WNBA she may be and in Europe she may be, but then so are EDD, Catchings, Moore, and Charles. And as far as USA basketball neither Anne Donovan nor Geno in the limited games she has played for him have found her to be good enough to be a starter. Playing in the same league over the last five years each of those players and Parker have all been deemed to be the greatest once. And all of them with the exception of EDD have been deemed to be better starters than Parker on the NT team.

 

[CocoHusky]

Except that looking at the statistics showed that she really wasn't a runaway over either EDD and Catchings and that there were legitimate arguments to be made for them over her.

There are legitimate statistical arguments to be made. The arguments are not being made by the poeple who made the decisions. The silence of the committee is deafening and confusing.

 

[Icebear]

There are legitimate statistical arguments to be made. The arguments are not being made by the poeple who made the decisions. The silence of the committee is deafening and confusing.

Yes, there are legitimate arguments to be made for all three and that in itself argues against it being some cataclysmic error to not choose her. We have no idea what the arguments made by the five members of the board/committee were nor if they told CP. it is none of our business. For all we know they may be protecting CP maybe she was considered divisive or there was some other non hoops issue. We simply don't know: but her greatness far above others is clearly over blown given her low starts in the past and other stats.

 

[CocoHusky]

Personally, I don't care if it was Geno who decided to keep her off the team or not. I also don't care if her stats indicate she is one of the 12 best players or not. The 12 most talented players don't necessarily make the best team. Geno doesn't always recruit the best high school players because he doesn't think they are always a good fit with his style or the team in general. So, maybe Geno did provide an opinion that she be left off the team. Maybe he doesn't think she is a good fit. Maybe it is technical in nature, maybe it is personal. Don't care. He was selected to coach the team for a reason. He is a genius. Tough crap if his decision upsets Tennessee fans or some super fans who THINK they know better.

You have done a good job of telling us what you don't care about. What do you care about?
PS This decision is upsetting to more than just Tennessee fans. This is about the selection of USA National nothing to do with TN or UCONN. I would have the same opinions if CP attended the University of Mars Blackmon.

 

[hoophuskee]

No offense taken. I also don't care that you care so we are even. And I will let you in on a little secret. Neither does Geno. Nor does it matter that you think she is a good fit because you are not, you know, the coach. I will put my trust in the hall of fame coach with 11 rings to know better than you do. Again, no offense. I mean, after all, the man is a genius as a coach.

As I have said too when I mention his move with Parker - I thought genius brilliant putting her as the 6th player. Geno brilliant. Now I'm extremely interested to see if the committee will keep their cut of Parker a secret. If they do and it stays that way- no problem. I don't believe Geno made this judgment. I think it came from he committee and I am eager to find out why from a basketball perspective. I think the decision was the committee's so we agree here Geno is not the culprit thus your points of 11 rings -- I don't believe is relevant.

 

[CocoHusky]

Yes, there are legitimate arguments to be made for all three and that in itself argues against it being some cataclysmic error to not choose her. We have no idea what the arguments made by the five members of the board/committee were nor if they told CP. it is none of our business. For all we know they may be protecting CP maybe she was considered divisive or there was some other non hoops issue. We simply don't know: but her greatness far above others is clearly over blown given her low starts in the past and other stats.

The bold parts kind of sums it up very accurately.
This part: "Her greatness far above others is clearly over blown given her low starts in the past and other stats." can't be true right if "We simply don't know"!

 

[hoophuskee]

Yes, there are legitimate arguments to be made for all three and that in itself argues against it being some cataclysmic error to not choose her. We have no idea what the arguments made by the five members of the board/committee were nor if they told CP. it is none of our business. For all we know they may be protecting CP maybe she was considered divisive or there was some other non hoops issue. We simply don't know: but her greatness far above others is clearly over blown given her low starts in the past and other stats.

I think this is an exgaerrated point. Who cares what others think whether it be "far above" or or "just above." The fact is - it is "above." And thus a question - if she is such a good passer vs other pf's why is she a bad fit?

 

[hoophuskee]

In the WNBA she may be and in Europe she may be, but then so are EDD, Catchings, Moore, and Charles. And as far as USA basketball neither Anne Donovan nor Geno in the limited games she has played for him have found her to be good enough to be a starter. Playing in the same league over the last five years each of those players and Parker have all been deemed to be the greatest once. And all of them with the exception of EDD have been deemed to be better starters than Parker on the NT team.

It shouldn't matter who starts. Geno a fan of the Celts how often has he said 6th man crucial. He had Maya coming off the bench early on when she was clearly best player. He often has had 6th men better than starters.

 

[baggerbob]

I would (assume and hope) they have all been given some type of explanation privately.

In reality the players not chosen are the only ones who need an explanation. For USA basketball to say anything publicly would demean the players, and the organization. Its really none of our business what the reasons are,for players not being selected.

 

[UcMiami]

I think this is an exgaerrated point. Who cares what others think whether it be "far above" or or "just above." The fact is - it is "above." And thus a question - if she is such a good passer vs other pf's why is she a bad fit?

Is it above at all:
Say the other player was Charles - WNBA POY in the last five years, and Charles is clearly a better post defender and at least as good from the foul line in on offense.
Say the other player was EDD - the current WNBA POY and a far better jump shooter.
Say the other player was Catchings - clearly a better defender from 15 feet out and a WNBA POY in the last 5 years as well as DPOY 5 times
Say the other player was Moore - clearly a better jump shooter and a WNBA POY in the last five years and a better perimeter defender.

There are the four most likely players chosen over Candace head to head - and Candace is not better than any one of them by objective measures.
You can argue that she is more versatile than any of those four and I am sure some of the committee made that argument but it obviously didn't carry weight with the majority.
And with five people on the committee the vote could have been split 3-2 on each one of these comparisons with different people included on the 3 side each time. So giving a 'single' answer would not be possible because 'the committee' is not a monolith. So you would end up with 12 different answers, and not one of them would satisfy anyone of the people who is complaining, and all twelve wouldn't either, and it would just add to the unpleasantness for everyone involved including all the players on team, Parker herself and the committee members. And that is answering the question on purely on the court execution - if some of the 12 decisions were based on consistency of effort, leadership qualities, chemistry issues, attitude, or any other aspect of being part of a 'team' it would get even worse and still not satisfy everyone.

Every answer that you could receive, would just lead to another question and another debate and more unpleasantness.

[And if you want to bring Stewart into the question as she is the other forward on the team (though I have previously explained that her selection is a foregone conclusion for every USA NT in the last 20 years as the spot reserved for a recent graduate) you can point to this - over the last seven years there is no one involved with USA basketball who has played in more games than Stewart nor won as many gold medals as she has - she has devoted the last seven summers to a USA basketball team and a few years to two different teams. No one comes anywhere near her level of loyalty to USA basketball and she is being rewarded for that. In fact only Tamika Catchings has won more gold medals in world competitions than Stewart and she has been playing 10+ years longer than Stewart.]

 

[Paesano]

You have done a good job of telling us what you don't care about. What do you care about?
PS This decision is upsetting to more than just Tennessee fans. This is about the selection of USA National nothing to do with TN or UCONN. I would have the same opinions if CP attended the University of Mars Blackmon.

Do you care about what I care about? If so, for the love of god, WHY?!?!?!

Look, if folks want to get their undies in a bunch over a decision they have no control over, have at it! For me, Geno can do what he wants. He has earned the benefit of the doubt. I want to see my teams win. I have no doubt they will. I don't care if tennessee fans or non-tennessee super fans are upset by the manner by which he provides the gold medal.

 

[CocoHusky]

Do you care about what I care about? If so, for the love of god, WHY?!?!?!

Look, if folks want to get their undies in a bunch over a decision they have no control over, have at it! For me, Geno can do what he wants. He has earned the benefit of the doubt. I want to see my teams win. I have no doubt they will. I don't care if tennessee fans or non-tennessee super fans are upset by the manner by which he provides the gold medal.

I care very much about what you think. I care enough to try and understand why you think any of this has to do with Geno or TN. How else could I possibly strongly disagree with you?

 

[hoophuskee]

Except that looking at the statistics showed that she really wasn't a runaway over either EDD and Catchings and that there were legitimate arguments to be made for them over her.

Who said anything about Parker over EDD?

And who said - one person-- that said Catchings is a better player than Parker? If they diid- I agree with those that isde wiht Parker. But I c recal hearing a reason why Catchings over Parker except that she has been here longer or maybe didn't cause trouble etc. But basketball reasons (maybe a basketball reason is that she doesn't cause trouble) - what do you think Catchings does well that trumps what Parker does well? For me- I have no problem with Cathcings. I have said I think Angel or Fowles were the two to get cut over Parker. Not the two you mentioned.

But Parker is runaway in terms of assists vs turnovers. Parker's assists to turnovers is 1.825. since the last Olympics. Neither EDD nor Catchings are close to that since last Olympics. You can't go counting Parker's career data since she was a rookie. Otherwise are you going to count when Parker 1t joined WNBA that her teams were tops defensively in wnba? No. Because she is different than back then.

 

[CocoHusky]

In reality the players not chosen are the only ones who need an explanation. For USA basketball to say anything publicly would demean the players, and the organization. Its really none of our business what the reasons are,for players not being selected.

I disagree. This team is going to represent my country in the Olympic games. I can choose to support them or not support them but either way they are definitely my business.

 

[Plebe]

There were a number of stories nationally that ran about Parker not being included on the team before the announcement was made. In a year where this team is expected to pretty easily win another gold, with a lot of the same faces they've had in the past, that's pretty much as big of a story line you're going to get for the team.

As for championships, my point was that the WNBA is a very competitive league, and it takes multiple great players (ideally in the post and at guard/wing), even if you're the best in the world, to win a championship. Sue Bird never won a championship without Lauren Jackson (who was arguably the best player in the world for a while). Diana Taurasi has never won a championships without at least two other great players on the roster. Go back to the initial Houston Comets teams--they had Cooper, Swoopes, and Thompson. The Sparks have two great posts in Parker and Nneka, but you need great guards in the WNBA to win at the highest level, particularly in the postseason.

Now that you mention Cynthia Cooper, it's perhaps worth remembering that she was not included in the 1996 Olympic roster, although she had been in both 1988 and 1992. Her exclusion was, I believe, not deemed controversial at the time because she simply wasn't known as the unstoppable force that she became in 1997 with the inauguration of the WNBA. But she certainly did make the committee look a bit foolish for having overlooked her in '96. She didn't just win the MVP award in '97; she ran away with it.

 

[hoophuskee]

Is it above at all:
Say the other player was Charles - WNBA POY in the last five years, and Charles is clearly a better post defender and at least as good from the foul line in on offense.
Say the other player was EDD - the current WNBA POY and a far better jump shooter.
Say the other player was Catchings - clearly a better defender from 15 feet out and a WNBA POY in the last 5 years as well as DPOY 5 times
Say the other player was Moore - clearly a better jump shooter and a WNBA POY in the last five years and a better perimeter defender.

There are the four most likely players chosen over Candace head to head - and Candace is not better than any one of them by objective measures.
You can argue that she is more versatile than any of those four and I am sure some of the committee made that argument but it obviously didn't carry weight with the majority.
And with five people on the committee the vote could have been split 3-2 on each one of these comparisons with different people included on the 3 side each time. So giving a 'single' answer would not be possible because 'the committee' is not a monolith. So you would end up with 12 different answers, and not one of them would satisfy anyone of the people who is complaining, and all twelve wouldn't either, and it would just add to the unpleasantness for everyone involved including all the players on team, Parker herself and the committee members. And that is answering the question on purely on the court execution - if some of the 12 decisions were based on consistency of effort, leadership qualities, chemistry issues, attitude, or any other aspect of being part of a 'team' it would get even worse and still not satisfy everyone.

Every answer that you could receive, would just lead to another question and another debate and more unpleasantness.

[And if you want to bring Stewart into the question as she is the other forward on the team (though I have previously explained that her selection is a foregone conclusion for every USA NT in the last 20 years as the spot reserved for a recent graduate) you can point to this - over the last seven years there is no one involved with USA basketball who has played in more games than Stewart nor won as many gold medals as she has - she has devoted the last seven summers to a USA basketball team and a few years to two different teams. No one comes anywhere near her level of loyalty to USA basketball and she is being rewarded for that. In fact only Tamika Catchings has won more gold medals in world competitions than Stewart and she has been playing 10+ years longer than Stewart.]

I have clearly said over-and-over in different terminolgy that Parker is above Angel and Fowles. Why are you bringing in Maya and Tina? I'm with all who say Maya and Tina should be in. And I'm okay with Catchings. And I have said I understand why cathcings is in- but Parker is better. I have argued against those who have claimed that Parker doesn't bring something above others. By that I meant a specific skill. I have showed that her assists to turnovers is superior vs. any of the would-be power forwards. The superior numbers speak for themselves.

As I stated to icebear- Parker's assists to turnovers over the past three years since the last Olympics (I think a comparison of after Olympics to now is more relevant than a 5year comparision.) superior to Maya's and vastly superior Cacthings or EDD. This doesn't mean I say that Parker is a superior player to Maya or EDD. It's a counter to those who say Parker doesn't have something the she excels at vs other player's at her position. She does! At pf - she is a combination of supreme passer and supreme finisher vs anyone in the game. It doesn't mean I think she is best player in all of basketball. It's just that's she brings something others don't and for example it trumps what Nneke brings or imo what Angel brings or Fowles brings. As long as you or anyone thinks she brings something special other than Angel, Fowles or Catchings - then I don't understand why anyone that agrees with just one-- thinks Parker shouldn't be on the team.