Diana in top form, Maya out of this world! | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Diana in top form, Maya out of this world!

Status
Not open for further replies.
RegisteredUconn said:
Nice thread and insights, mom, and my post has absolutely nothing to do with that. Just me exorcising an inner demon about qualifying the unqualifiable (if there is such a word): in this case, the word unique. Unique is one of those words like "round" (meaning circular or spherical) that cannot peacefully coexist with a qualifier. Something is either round or it isn't: things can't be "more round" than other things (mathematics can be such a bitch). Oxymoronically speaking, unique means one-of-a-kind (how can "a kind" be involved if there's only one?). Anyway, I don't think something can be "very unique." Sorry for dumping the sins of many at the feet of one, i.e., you. In my defense, I'm probably having a slow day. In conclusion, sounds like things are going great for you and I hope you're able to re-read this with your sense of humor engaged (nothing like a little heavy-handed rebuking to something of absolutely no consequence to bring out the chuckles and murmurs of "Isn't he adorable?").
Expand ...
Lol! I may never use that word again. I found your explanation quite enlightening! Another reason to love The Boneyard! :)
 
RegisteredUconn said:
Nice thread and insights, mom, and my post has absolutely nothing to do with that. Just me exorcising an inner demon about qualifying the unqualifiable (if there is such a word): in this case, the word unique. Unique is one of those words like "round" (meaning circular or spherical) that cannot peacefully coexist with a qualifier. Something is either round or it isn't: things can't be "more round" than other things (mathematics can be such a bitch). Oxymoronically speaking, unique means one-of-a-kind (how can "a kind" be involved if there's only one?). Anyway, I don't think something can be "very unique." Sorry for dumping the sins of many at the feet of one, i.e., you. In my defense, I'm probably having a slow day. In conclusion, sounds like things are going great for you and I hope you're able to re-read this with your sense of humor engaged (nothing like a little heavy-handed rebuking to something of absolutely no consequence to bring out the chuckles and murmurs of "Isn't he adorable?").
Expand ...

Like Ctmom, I also like this kind of a response as why the Boneyard is so much fun to read and participate in. And as one who comes from a family of language professors and who writes for a paycheck, I also try to be very precise with words.

So, I feel duty bound to point out that unique has an additional meaning that diminishes the sense of one-of-a-kind, and that is that something is not typical. Thus, you can say someone's dress habits are very unique to mean that they are further from the norm then other persons, though they might not be truly one-of-a-kind.

Similarly, there is round as a mathematical principle, and round as a general descriptor. Compare a baseball and a ping pong ball. You would certainly call a baseball round, even though it isn't quite truly that due to the stitching, because it is more round than it is square. The ping pong, without the stitching, thus becomes more round. :)
 
cabbie191 said:
Like Ctmom, I also like this kind of a response as why the Boneyard is so much fun to read and participate in. And as one who comes from a family of language professors and who writes for a paycheck, I also try to be very precise with words.

So, I feel duty bound to point out that unique has an additional meaning that diminishes the sense of one-of-a-kind, and that is that something is not typical. Thus, you can say someone's dress habits are very unique to mean that they are further from the norm then other persons, though they might not be truly one-of-a-kind.

Similarly, there is round as a mathematical principle, and round as a general descriptor. Compare a baseball and a ping pong ball. You would certainly call a baseball round, even though it isn't quite truly that due to the stitching, because it is more round than it is square. The ping pong, without the stitching, thus becomes more round. :)
Expand ...
You are probably much more precise in the use of language than I. Obviously (or maybe not), I was trying to be tongue-in-cheek to a degree, and tried to inject definitions of both "round" and "unique" to avoid confusion with other common uses of the terms. Outside the purely mental world of mathematics I doubt anything is actually round. Neither would it surprise me to discover that everything is really unique which, in a way, renders the word useless. Maybe ctmom04 is a trailblazer in eschewing its continued use.
 
RegisteredUconn said:
You are probably much more precise in the use of language than I. Obviously (or maybe not), I was trying to be tongue-in-cheek to a degree, and tried to inject definitions of both "round" and "unique" to avoid confusion with other common uses of the terms. Outside the purely mental world of mathematics I doubt anything is actually round. Neither would it surprise me to discover that everything is really unique which, in a way, renders the word useless. Maybe ctmom04 is a trailblazer in eschewing its continued use.
Expand ...

And interestingly, it may also be equally true that nothing is really unique. In both situations, your point is well made and I totally agree with you. And yes, it was clear to me that you were tongue-in-cheek.
 
cabbie191 said:
And interestingly, it may also be equally true that nothing is really unique. In both situations, your point is well made and I totally agree with you. And yes, it was clear to me that you were tongue-in-cheek.
Expand ...
How can I not "Like" a post that totally agrees with me?!?!!
 
ctmom04 said:
Hmmmm....Minnesota at Tulsa tonight.
Maya Moore-33 points on 12-21 shooting. 11 rebounds and 3 assists.
Skylar Diggins-21points on 7-17 shooting. 1 rebound and 12 assists.
Very good game by Skylar at home but not living in Maya's universe.

Minnesota wins 91-85 without Augustus or Brunson.
Expand ...

Maya ws directly involved in 39 points being scored, Skylar was direclty involved in 45 points being scored. Maya scored more points but Skylar had more impact on offense.

I wouldn't expect Maya to have as many assists or Skylar to have as many rebounds.
 
.-.
ctmom04 said:
Last year the argument was that Maya should have won the award because she was the best player on the best team. Obviously it didn't work out that way since Parker got the award. It is not always the best player on the best team. If the Lynx can start beating Phoenix in the second half of the season, IMO Maya wins the award, even if they finish second in the west. If Phoenix continues to dominate the Lynx, the award goes to Diana. That won't be as easy since Augustus and Brunson should be returning right after the All Star game.
Expand ...

Well, I just said that she gets my vote, which last time I checked didn't really cout for much in the MVP balloting.

Although I think Maya is a tremendous player, I do not think she has the same impact on her teammates that DT does. DT is a coach on the court and brings out the best of her teammates. Maya seems to have the freedom to just focus on her game and doesn't really seem to be the same type of team leader on the court. DT brings all of the intangibles that I look for in an MVP.
 
easttexastrash said:
Maya ws directly involved in 39 points being scored, Skylar was directly involved in 45 points being scored. Maya scored more points but Skylar had more impact on offense.

I wouldn't expect Maya to have as many assists or Skylar to have as many rebounds.
Expand ...
Bingo. I had the same thought. They play different positions, so comparing their stat lines is interesting, but not a valid way to compare. (That said, I would still like to see the beat-down Maya puts on Sky in a one-on-one matchup.)
 
Mark my words- if Tulsa gets to the playoffs Skylar will win the MVP.

However...if LA gets there Candace will win it two years in a row...
 
If wishes were horses.... Shock are 9 games out at 7-13 (.350). In the WNBA most teams get in the playoffs, several with sub-.500 records. It's actually hard NOT to get into the playoffs, but Tulsa is on that track. And they've lost their last 3 in a row, so they really need to turn things around soon. They might. Regardless, Skylar is not MVP.
 
Striper69 said:
Mark my words- if Tulsa gets to the playoffs Skylar will win the MVP.

However...if LA gets there Candace will win it two years in a row...
Expand ...

I don't think Candace wins for just getting to the playoffs. If LA is the last team in, then the award will go to either DT or Moore. I actually think it will be DT or Moore regardless of which other teams make it. IMO, DT should win, but Maya really stepped up in the absence of some starters.
 
.-.
Here is a look at some of the major statistical categories up to this point.
Points Rebounds. Assists. Blocks. Steals. Efficiency

Maya 1 10 18 15 6 1
Diana 5 36 2 50 44 7
Candace 4 14 6 4 5 2
Skylar 2 Out of 4 27 13 12
Top 50
Maya is ranked 1 for points AND efficiency. She is also in the top 20 in all major categories.
Diana is solid across the board. She ranks 5 in ppg and 2 in assists.
Candace again having a great year. Ranked 4 in points and ranked 2 in efficiency. She also is in the top 20 in every category.
Skylar ranks 2 in points and 4 in assists. She is the only one to be out of the top 50 in a major cat. (Rebounds).
 
easttexastrash said:
I don't think Candace wins for just getting to the playoffs. If LA is the last team in, then the award will go to either DT or Moore. I actually think it will be DT or Moore regardless of which other teams make it. IMO, DT should win, but Maya really stepped up in the absence of some starters.
Expand ...
Good point about Maya stepping up in the absence of other key players - the "Kevin Durant" factor. Still think DT is bringing an overdose of that intangible "it" factor (leadership?) this year, but there's no stat for that. Except wins.
 
I think being in first place in the west this year will be a disadvantage. If rankings stay the same, Phoenix will have to go through L.A. and then Minnesota to get to the finals. Minnesota will face San Antonio and the winner of L.A./Phoenix. I don't believe the Spark's record is indicative of just how dangerous they could be.
 
I suspect that LA will pull it together at some point and end up in the 3rd position. But if they don't, then they are truly the 4th best team. Phoenix did lose to SA at home and has not lost to LA.
 
ctmom04 said:
Here is a look at some of the major statistical categories up to this point.
Points Rebounds. Assists. Blocks. Steals. Efficiency

Maya 1 10 18 15 6 1
Diana 5 36 2 50 44 7
Candace 4 14 6 4 5 2
Skylar 2 Out of 4 27 13 12
Top 50
Maya is ranked 1 for points AND efficiency. She is also in the top 20 in all major categories.
Diana is solid across the board. She ranks 5 in ppg and 2 in assists.
Candace again having a great year. Ranked 4 in points and ranked 2 in efficiency. She also is in the top 20 in every category.
Skylar ranks 2 in points and 4 in assists. She is the only one to be out of the top 50 in a major cat. (Rebounds).
Expand ...

It is hard to use "per game" stats when Maya plays about 4 more minutes a game than DT.

I would not argue against either winning. They are both bringing what their teams need.
 
easttexastrash said:
It is hard to use "per game" stats when Maya plays about 4 more minutes a game than DT.

I would not argue against either winning. They are both bringing what their teams need.
Expand ...
That is why I included efficiency rating. Even though she can score more points in 4 mpg, she can also turn the ball over more or miss shots taken. Take note that Maya is ranked #1 in efficiency.

As far as LA, they always come on stronger the second half of the year and they keep games close. They have the talent to beat either Minnesota or Phoenix. I would much rather face SA if I had the choice.

I also agree that I would be happy with either one winning. Both would be deserving.
 
.-.
ctmom04 said:
That is why I included efficiency rating. Even though she can score more points in 4 mpg, she can also turn the ball over more or miss shots taken. Take note that Maya is ranked #1 in efficiency.

As far as LA, they always come on stronger the second half of the year and they keep games close. They have the talent to beat either Minnesota or Phoenix. I would much rather face SA if I had the choice.

I also agree that I would be happy with either one winning. Both would be deserving.
Expand ...

Intangibles cannot be tracked via a statistic. IMO, DT does more to bring the rest of her team to high levels than does Maya. Maya is not in the same leadership role as DT, as that role is primarily filled by the PG, which would be Whalen for Minny.

Maya and DT are both directly invoved in approximately 30 ppg (points and assist combined), so on offense, it is a wash. They are both sooooo damn good.
 
ctmom04 said:
That is why I included efficiency rating. Even though she can score more points in 4 mpg, she can also turn the ball over more or miss shots taken. Take note that Maya is ranked #1 in efficiency.

As far as LA, they always come on stronger the second half of the year and they keep games close. They have the talent to beat either Minnesota or Phoenix. I would much rather face SA if I had the choice.

I also agree that I would be happy with either one winning. Both would be deserving.
Expand ...

Based on efficiency, the top three performers in the league are Maya, Parker and Griner. And Griner should win that three person race because she has the highest rating per 40 minutes of the three. Griner would win the MVP award based on per 40 minutes as it would be hard to give the award to Catchings, who leads the league in per 40 minutes, based on games played.
 
Last edited:
Over the years, in all sports, the leagues MVP have been selected more and more often than not, by those scoring the most points (or touchdowns or home runs) . But please remember the MVP stands for
Most VALUABLE Player.
To me, that means that a player not only scores a lot of points, but is the player that without them, the TEAM would suffer the biggest letdown in overall performance.
JMO...
 
ctmom04 said:
I think being in first place in the west this year will be a disadvantage. If rankings stay the same, Phoenix will have to go through L.A. and then Minnesota to get to the finals. Minnesota will face San Antonio and the winner of L.A./Phoenix. I don't believe the Spark's record is indicative of just how dangerous they could be.
Expand ...

LA looked like they were getting things back together yesterday (finally).
 
ctmom04 said:
I think being in first place in the west this year will be a disadvantage. If rankings stay the same, Phoenix will have to go through L.A. and then Minnesota to get to the finals. Minnesota will face San Antonio and the winner of L.A./Phoenix. I don't believe the Spark's record is indicative of just how dangerous they could be.
Expand ...
You may be right about the disadvantage. I went to PHX-San Antonio game yesterday and the Stars were pretty unimpressive. Griner didn't get many blocks, but they jammed up the middle enough so SA couldn't get anything inside. And the Stars couldn't hit jack from outside. On the other end Phoenix absolutely schooled them with Taurasi-to-Dupree feeds. It was a blowout by halftime, so DT and BG hardly played at all in the 2nd half and there wasn't that much drop-off. Erin Phillips came in for most of the 2nd half and killed them with 3's. Based on yesterday's game you can stick a fork in San Antonio. Mercury hitting on all cylinders right now, but looks like LA might be starting to click too - may be dangerous.
 
easttexastrash said:
Maya ws directly involved in 39 points being scored, Skylar was direclty involved in 45 points being scored. Maya scored more points but Skylar had more impact on offense.

I wouldn't expect Maya to have as many assists or Skylar to have as many rebounds.
Expand ...

Skyar may very well "have had more impact on offense." Probably had much more negative impact than Moore. While Skylar did score 21 she was 7-17. Moore was 12-21. If you count Skylar's assists then you have to count her turnovers too. And because assists is basically a bump for a guard in ths this type of discussion, offensive rebounding should count for Moore to though she just had one. If you aren't going to count the turnovers and the offenisve rebounds then what's the point of commenting on who had more offensive impact? Why not just speak of "direct" and leave it at that? Inefficient shooting is a detriment. IMO it should be counted if you are to speak of total offensive impact.
 
.-.
Basically, anything you do CAN impact the offense, but only two things directly impact points, which are shots made and assists. If you get an offensive rebound but your team doesn't score off that rebound then you truly had no impact on the offense. If you steal the ball but your team doesn't convert the steal into points, you had no impact on the offense.
 
Last edited:
easttexastrash said:
Basically, anything you do CAN impact the offense, but only two things directly impact points, which are shots made and assists. If you get an offensive rebound but your team doesn't score off that rebound then you truly had no impact on the offense. If you steal the ball but your team doesn't convert the steal into points, you had no impact on the offense.
Expand ...

You're right but "direct impact" alone shouldn't lead to a conclusion as you stated - "Maya scored more points but Skylar had more impact on offense." If you speak of overall offensive impact of a player then efficiency must also be taken into consideration.
 
Reading this thread gives one the uneasy feeling that there is an anti-Skylar bias remaining from her collegiate career.

I think it's splendid how much she improved this season and especially after a relatively undistinguished initial campaign.
That she is even under discussion for exalted honors is a credit to her ability and her dogged stubbornness to succeed.

A refreshing if not entirely political correct concept is the willingness of attractive female-type athletes, (those with big press reps and world-class agents, loads of endorsements and barrels of money thrown at them win or lose) to compete like heck this year, like their life depended upon it, loads different from the Kourinkova syndrome of a decade ago; especially thinking of Wie, Sharapova, even Ivanovic as well as Skylar.``
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
167,988
Messages
4,548,499
Members
10,431
Latest member
TeganK


Top Bottom