ESPN re-ranks the top 25 players in WCBB

[nwhoopfan]

Did Lauren Cox do a great job of holding Brittany Brewer to 24 points on 10-17 shooting? I cherry picked that one, but she hasn't quite shut down everybody she's played against.

 

[cbraarj]

What a joke. Boston should be Top 5 any any list. It's not just the stats, but few influence a game like she is doing. MW at #8?? Geez - no WNBA team would draft her in the 1st round right now.

Not against Uconn! Olivia made her shoot from the outside.

 

[Gamecockfan77]

Not against Uconn! Olivia made her shoot from the outside.

I think Boston influenced the UCONN game quite a bit myself.

 

[ReadR00ster]

Not against Uconn! Olivia made her shoot from the outside.

Olivia by her self? How about UConn get out that sagging zone with all those players right by the rim and see how she handles Boston woman-on-woman?

 

[BobbyJ]

I'd consider them greater than fans considering they make their living analyzing women's basketball and publishing articles about the sport. Not sure what differentiates experts from fans if that doesn't.

Larry Bird doesn't make a living analyzing WBB and doesn't publish articles about it either but that's a person I'd consider an expert. Charlie Creme was nothing but a pharmaceutical sales rep and basketball fan that ESPN hired around 2005 to come up with brackets when his friend declined the job. And as of 2017 he was still a sales rep. So they weren't paying him much for his "expertise". He just makes guesses based on what he can get from his contacts on the NCAA committee. Just another media person, no special insight on BB.

 

[WestCoast]

Harris and Cooke have struggled a bit making 2s, but have hit a good percentage from 3.

South Carolina has been so good on the offensive glass that some of those misses might as well be assists.

Exactly. While South Carolina's guards aren't great pure shooters, the team's collective ability to rebound and defend is what provides the separation from opposing teams.

 

[bbfanLA]

Larry Bird doesn't make a living analyzing WBB and doesn't publish articles about it either but that's a person I'd consider an expert. Charlie Creme was nothing but a pharmaceutical sales rep and basketball fan that ESPN hired around 2005 to come up with brackets when his friend declined the job. And as of 2017 he was still a sales rep. So they weren't paying him much for his "expertise". He just makes guesses based on what he can get from his contacts on the NCAA committee. Just another media person, no special insight on BB.

I’ve been a journalist for most of my adult life. But it was always a side gig because it’s EXTREMELY difficult to make a decent living as a journalist only. Granted, I do live in Los Angeles where everything is expensive. Anyways, I’m very knowledgeable about the things I write about, but that doesn’t mean I get paid what I should. I have many friends who are journalists and, not counting the ones who work for networks full-time, most are journalists on the side while working a “real” job to pay the bills. I get asked all the time - and I mean all the time - why I don’t interview celebrities near as much as I used to. I always say that while it’s fun and “glamorous” in theory, it’s not as much fun when you take into account the time it takes and how little you get paid sometimes. I have a friend who works for the Los Angeles Times who has a background in PR like I do. We’ve been talking about teaming up to do some freelance PR together because he doesn’t make enough from the LA Times. I’m not picking on you, but I think a lot of people think journalists make a lot more money than they actually do. For most journalists, journalism is a hobby that they happen to be paid for.

 

[BobbyJ]

I’ve been a journalist for most of my adult life. But it was always a side gig because it’s EXTREMELY difficult to make a decent living as a journalist only. Granted, I do live in Los Angeles where everything is expensive. Anyways, I’m very knowledgeable about the things I write about, but that doesn’t mean I get paid what I should. I have many friends who are journalists and, not counting the ones who work for networks full-time, most are journalists on the side while working a “real” job to pay the bills. I get asked all the time - and I mean all the time - why I don’t interview celebrities near as much as I used to. I always say that while it’s fun and “glamorous” in theory, it’s not as much fun when you take into account the time it takes and how little you get paid sometimes. I have a friend who works for the Los Angeles Times who has a background in PR like I do. We’ve been talking about teaming up to do some freelance PR together because he doesn’t make enough from the LA Times. I’m not picking on you, but I think a lot of people think journalists make a lot more money than they actually do. For most journalists, journalism is a hobby that they happen to be paid for.

I understand your point. However, Charlie isn't a trained journalist like you. He was a sales rep who fell into this media job because he was a BB fan who liked to play around with stats. Big difference imo. And just because some of these other people are in the media, I don't believe that necessarily makes them journalists. And it also doesn't make them BB experts because they watch and read a lot about BB. Many fans, ex-coaches, and ex-players do that and can be just as knowledgeable about BB. Working in the media doesn't give them any special insight to the game.

 

[bbfanLA]

I understand your point. However, Charlie isn't a trained journalist like you. He was a sales rep who fell into this media job because he was a BB fan who liked to play around with stats. Big difference imo. And just because some of these other people are in the media, I don't believe that necessarily makes them journalists. And it also doesn't make them BB experts because they watch and read a lot about BB. Many fans, ex-coaches, and ex-players do that and can be just as knowledgeable about BB. Working in the media doesn't give them any special insight to the game.

Trust me, I can tell story after story of different press conferences when a “journalist” would ask someone such a cringeworthy question that I was embarrassed. Or the many times I’ve read an article and wondered if it was written by a middle schooler. With anyone able to write a blog now, the definition of what qualifies as journalism nowadays is very blurry. It makes me sad but it is what it is now.

 

[cbraarj]

Olivia by her self? How about UConn get out that sagging zone with all those players right by the rim and see how she handles Boston woman-on-woman?

If Boston was in Olivias position on her team. How good would she really be?

 

[WestCoast]

If Boston was in Olivias position on her team. How good would she really be?

Is your question how good would Boston be if on the UConn roster? If so, I think that the answer would be very good. I think that Boston's presence on UConn would have resulted in at least one less loss this season and perhaps two so far. I think Boston would be a 15/10 player on UConn and would make things alot easier for CW, MW, and CD.

 

[Gamecockfan77]

If Boston was in Olivias position on her team. How good would she really be?

UCONN would probably give her more minutes, so I would think her numbers would be better.

 

[cbraarj]

UCONN would probably give her more minutes, so I would think her numbers would be better.

Boston has help on the boards alot more than Olivia.

 

[cbraarj]

Is your question how good would Boston be if on the UConn roster? If so, I think that the answer would be very good. I think that Boston's presence on UConn would have resulted in at least one less loss this season and perhaps two so far. I think Boston would be a 15/10 player on UConn and would make things alot easier for CW, MW, and CD.

She has Harrigan that gives her an advantage. After the first quarter Ono had better stats than Boston!

 

[SCGamecock]

Exactly. While South Carolina's guards aren't great pure shooters, the team's collective ability to rebound and defend is what provides the separation from opposing teams.

It’s ironic that the best pure shooter on the team IMO, is a stretch forward. Mikiah Herbert-Harrigan’s midrange game is lethal and she can bury you from 3. As much as I love Ty and Boston (and others) Kiki is the most dangerous shooter we have which makes her a matchup nightmare because not a lot of forwards currently in WCBB are pure shooters like her. The only other person on the team that compares long range is Destanni Henderson. Ty Harris is also a good midrange shooter but she’s streaky more often than not.

 

[Dokey]

Is there a list of 25 top frosh? That might tell us about what future holds.

 

[Gamecockfan77]

It’s ironic that the best pure shooter on the team IMO, is a stretch forward. Mikiah Herbert-Harrigan’s midrange game is lethal and she can bury you from 3. As much as I love Ty and Boston (and others) Kiki is the most dangerous shooter we have which makes her a matchup nightmare because not a lot of forwards currently in WCBB are pure shooters like her. The only other person on the team that compares long range is Destanni Henderson. Ty Harris is also a good midrange shooter but she’s streaky more often than not.

Harris is at 40% from 3 in conference play and I think Cooke must be getting close: she was at 38% before Thursday's 4/4.

add Kiki and the balance is there. She and Cooke have been a little lost in the shuffle, but our top 4 match up with anybody right now.

if Beal is going to start hitting now, it will be hard on opponents.

 

[bballnut90]

Is there a list of 25 top frosh? That might tell us about what future holds.

This is definitely the most impactful freshman class weve had in long time. Lots of really good players on top teams and then a slew of strong performers on less heralded programs as well. Future looks bright.