All true, and the issue of comparing UConn players versus other teams' players while they are in college is the problem of how to balance the stats benefits that UConn players get from playing on a nicely polished machine versus the disadvantages they have of sharing time with stars and maybe being the 5th option for scoring when they're on the floor. Puzzles me when the Chong detractors carp that she doesn't score a lot more when they would also be howling that she would be taking shots away from a Stewie or KML or MoJeff or . . . . .
But when it comes to WNBA status, we can all cherry pick our examples to fit our set viewpoint, like matching the 2nd pick in the draft against the 7th pick in the draft and using that as the sum up of UConn non superstars in the WNBA, especially when the Baylor player at #2 is custom made for the WNBA since she has always been able to live at the foul line. I might ask though why not pick two players in the draft who were at fairly similar positions, say #1 Maya Moore and #2 Odyssey Sims? Seems more logical to me. I doubt you need a freshman year stat comparison of Moore vs. Sims.
Or I could argue the opposite with cherry-picked comparisons, but in reverse strategy. Let's take another UConn non-superstar like Hartley with some years in the league. Take Kalana Greene (2010 BET MOP ahead of Charles and Moore), which the Liberty did with the 13th (R2 #1) pick of the draft. Using your method, I would compare her to #8 pick Andrea Riley, an OK State guard with a 21 ppg college average. Greene after recovering from college ACL issues put in 4 1/2 seasons and racked up 667 points before being cut by the Sun, while Riley was gone after 2 1/2 seasons with 324 points. Move up another draft spot to the 2010 #7 spot and you find the Sun's top pick, Kansas star guard Danielle McCray, who like Greene has been somewhat dogged by ACL and other issues. Greene has accounted for almost 300 more points in her career. Move higher up in the draft to #6 Jacinta Monroe or all the way to #3 Kelsey Griffin and you still find players that were either far outperformed by Greene or in Griffin's case, not much ahead in stats.
So yes, the truth of the matter is always in the eye of the beholder of the stats sheets.