Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="CocoHusky, post: 3436756, member: 5823"] I had a slightly different take on the chart. I think it is significant when a player reaches Consensus #1 in High school. As with the [USER=343]@meyers7[/USER] post which I copied here I think HS Consensus #1 is a great starting point (not definitive) for identifying generational talent. In the decade prior to the [USER=10475]@and one[/USER] attachment there were 5 players that achieved consensus HS #1 Maya, Parker EDD, Tina and Brittney Griner. I would make the argument that Maya, EDD, Parker, and Griner solidify their status as generational talents while Tina's play, especially her Freshman and Sophomore [B]did not[/B] solidify her status. That solidify is the most important because a big part of my criteria is how early you get the label and how well you carry it. Can a Non-Consensus HS #1 ever become a generational talent? Sure, but I just can't think of one right now & Sabrina might come the closest. Is anyone really prepared to say that Sabrina was more of a talent than Tina Charles or A'ja Wilson? I would also strongly disagree with the concept that we could apply the generation talent label with a caveat for a specific school as in, A'Ja Wilson being a "generational player for South Carolina." For me a generational talent would have been a BOSS regardless of where they played. [/QUOTE]