Gosh, I Hope Moriah Is Justly Rewarded...

[Orangutan]

I believe Gladwell's point was that the early-year birthdays puts these kids in the older group on their teams. Being older and more physically developed, they typically get more playing time, while the younger group sits on the bench more. This gives the older group a huge developmental advantage. So if this is true in WBB, then wouldn't we expect to see more WCBB players who are "old for their age" rather than fewer?

BTW I haven't seen it, but I heard about a study which supposedly disproves Gladwell's theory on this (his theory was based on the % of early-year birthday Canadian youth hockey players who ultimately made it to the NHL).

FWIW there is also unresolved educational controversy about whether it's more advantageous to enter first grade as 'young' as possible (get an earlier start learning material that in reality can be learned by humans at a much younger age), or wait and be more physically and emotionally mature and more able to focus, etc.

I depends on how the eligibilty works. If it is determine by grade level, then a player like Jewell will be advantaged. The scenario Gladwell was talking about was teams where eligiblity was based on "hasn't turned (age) by Jan. 1," which meant that the kid who turned (age) on Jan. 2 was hugely advantaged.

It's also possible that Gladwell was spouting garbage (he often is) or that it does have some effect but not for wcbb. I know that someone on the ND board checked all the other players ages and none of them were eligible to leave early, which struck me as odd because I turned 22 in my senior year of college just like Jewell did. That's what got me thinking.

Incidentally, when I googled Jewell's birthday, KML's came up with the related results. Turns out KML was born about a month after Jewell. Who knew? (Probably lots of people but it surprised me).

 

[WestCoastFan]

A couple of observations. In large part I feel as though the media is the source for the "Stewie is going after her 4th" etc. Certainly a contributing factor was the fact that Stewart showed up on campus and to some question posed by media her response was to the effect of "I am here to try to win 4 titles. Mo never said it, Tuck never said it. So I draw the conclusion that since that was what she said the media is going with her her name going after #4. Without Dolson, Hartley, KML, and of course Faris they may not have 2013, without KML and Stokes, Dolson, Hartley, maybe no title in 2014, and without Mo especially maybe not in 2015. Stewart said so. Now this group may well accomplish that which has never been done before should they win title 11 and 4 in a row. Hard pressed however to suggest this is a better team or the best of all time.....think about that roster that had Bird, Cash, Jones, Williams, Schumaker, Ralph, Abrosamova, and of course that year we introduced some gal named Diana, who made a pretty good name for herself during her career.

I agree with the "best class ever", if they win it in April. Can't imagine how you could argue with a 4-peat for those three. Long ways away from that yet...it'll be fun to watch!!

 

[Bayareahusky]

and if that happens in april..... i would say even now it will never happen again..... and riding the tailwind of fanciful conjecture.... if Morgan stays and wins 5 in a row.... there is another that never would be equalled.....

 

[Carnac]

Prince wasn't WNBA-eligible when she left. She had to wait a year before she could join the WNBA, which she knew. She just left early so she could make money playing overseas and help her family--she grew up in an NYC housing project. Anyone could do that but few people are a) good enough to get solid overseas money with no US pro experience and b) need money that badly.

Loyd is older than most players in her class, so she was eligible because she turns 22 this fall. She can only be so much of a trendsetter in that most players don't turn 22 until spring of their senior year and aren't eligible under that part of the rule.

Side note: Malcolm Gladwell notes in his book Outliers that more elite athletes have early-year birthdays and theorizes that that's because of the way travel team age cutoffs work. I'll bet that's true of women's basketball as well, which is why we haven't seen many players presented with Loyd's option.

With respect to Moriah, San Antonio's choice was fascinating. I would take Moriah and try to deal D-Rob, but just taking Mitchell is attractive as well. I'm not sure D-Rob can win you a title at PG, so sticking with her and trading the pick doesn't seem smart to me, though I suppose it depends on the return.

San Antonio has so many needs, I would suggest that no trade scenario is impossible. Depending on the players offered in a trade offer, anything is possible. IMO, Kayla McBride would be the only player that would NOT be available for trade. I'm sure the SA GM will listen to any trade offer. They've got to do something. They were horrible this past season. The team they put on the floor didn't come close to getting it done. There's nowhere for them to go but up. Front office jobs may be on the line if the Stars don't show significant improvement next season. Other than McBride, Danielle Robinson and their first round pick, who do the Stars have that a team would put a package together for?

 

[UcMiami]

Carnac - in reality MN already traded away their most likely trade bait in season to acquire Fowles - young post players that SA could really use.
On the WNBA rules, what isn't mentioned in the eligibility issue is that it is both age and 'class' - so a hypothetical younger player who excelled academically and graduated a year ahead of her age mates would be eligible. With athletes the opposite appears to be a more frequent situation with parents sometimes keeping kids back so they are competing with younger kids.

Hate to compare children to race horses - but the value of foals is directly correlated to the months in which they are borne (and therefore the breeding is very carefully regulated. The earlier in a year a foal is borne the better, as it gives them extra months of growth and development for racing as a two year old - just two months makes a huge difference as it represents an extra 10 percent or so of growth. An extra year for a human competing at 20 years old represents 5% more development, and a higher percentage of the 'skill set' development that is probably more important.