It's really easy to look at scoring as the biggest component when defining a player and deciding whether or not they're good. How big of an offensive threat are they? How many 3s can they drain in one night? How many fast break layups can they put in? It's flashy and it's fun to look at - scoring is obviously a huge component of the game. I'm sure we'd all like to see KLS, Pheese, Gabby, Kia, and Saniya just go on a 5 game rotation where they each score 30+ a game. KLS one night, Pheese the next, and so on and so forth. Pop a few big games from Crystal Dangerfield and Butler, and a few big 3s from TLaw and we'd be one happy bunch.
But... in my book,
aside from measurable skill set, a good player is someone who is thinking about the team first and foremost. With UConn, that mindset is pretty much ingrained in them by the history of the program before they ever set foot in Storrs, not to mention the fact that Geno only recruits team players and those committed to the 'team above all else' mindset. If their shots aren't falling, they aren't getting good looks, or even in those cases where another player has hot hands and they want to get the ball to that player as much as possible because it's their hot night... what are they doing to impact the game in other ways? Are they playing good defense? Are they racking up a nice spread of assists? Are they being careful about their TOs and fouls? If they're on the bench, how involved are they in the game? Are they cheering for their teammates the way they'd want their teammates to cheer for them? As someone who
grew up (I'm giving away my young age here, but so be it!) watching this program, those are the "little" things that matter a lot to me. Since you mentioned Saniya and Kia by name as good examples of the 'Are they a good player?' carousel:
Saniya might not throw up 10+ points a game, but I don't doubt that she's a good player. Is she the best that's ever walked through the doors at UConn? No, but how many kids are? For every one big name, there's going to be kids that are never
quite that great. They'll make dumb mistakes. They won't have stellar breakout games that we'll go back and watch for years on end. In 10 years time, most people probably won't remember their name unless they were hardcore fans of the girl or hardcore fans of the program. But that doesn't mean she's not good. She's obviously good - she ended up at UConn, right? She only has 5 turnovers on the year. She's made some incredible assists. Her defense has improved from where she started from. Not every game will be her game. Not every game will be a good game for her. But when it counts, she's getting things done. She's a steady player, and sometimes I think that's at least a little undervalued when the other girls are doing incredible and flashy things on the court. She's a senior, and she's handled the big games of this season very well. Her teammates will learn from that, and in my opinion, that's a good thing.
It's the same thing with Kia. She might never be consistent offensively at UConn. To compare her Canadian numbers to her UConn numbers feels like it's doing a bit of a disservice to her as a player because she plays two completely
different roles. Kia isn't the first scoring choice on UConn. At UConn, her defensive play and the energy she brings is her strong suit while still being able to be a threat offensively when she needs to be and when she's got hot hands. On the Canadian NT, she was considered to be a go-to scorer. (She performed better in 2015 internationally than at the Olympics, in my opinion. She still, however, looked solid at the exhibition game between Canada and France at MSG before Rio.) Her roles are different, and even Geno has said that. She doesn't need to pop up 20+ points a game here at UConn for me to consider her a good player. Come on, she's an Olympian and was the youngest player to make the Canadian NT. She played
against Geno before she played
for him. I think she can be classified as a good player.
Just because they're scoring a ton of points doesn't always mean they're playing well or a good player. Just because they're not scoring a ton of points doesn't always mean they're
not playing well or not a good player. It's about perception and context, I suppose. They're paying Geno the big bucks to be the judge, and better him than me! This is merely
personal opinion. I apologize for the long-winded rant, but it was a slow day around here and this is a very interesting topic.
