You are correct.. but there can be many "generational" players....just so you know .Ever see Breanna Stewart’s resume? These go with 4 consecutive National Championships. (Psssst, she’s a real generational player)
View attachment 50516
You are correct.. but there can be many "generational" players....just so you know .Ever see Breanna Stewart’s resume? These go with 4 consecutive National Championships. (Psssst, she’s a real generational player)
View attachment 50516
We should win the game.
Boring offense...round and round the horn
Their celebrated big didn't do much...and she may be injured.
Outside shooting up and down.
The pass up a lot of shots that UConn would take, both in the lane
and outside.
Not impressive.
It all depends on the players tolerance for pain.It's weird to see a torn ACL injury where the player jogs off the court and jogs into the locker room.
Not if Uconn plays like they did in 2nd half of game against Tennessee!if UCONN plays like they did against Tennessee, South Carolina will win comfortably. (As long as Boston is fine)
(and the game won't be decided based on how either team matched up vs Tennessee. Should be interesting)
It all depends on the players tolerance for pain.
No worries, ya'll be fine. They'll show themselves as very beatable like when Mississippi State brought them down to earth.
…...or if South Carolina plays like they did the first half against Tennessee....this is really a silly way to decide a game that will be played on a basketball court. The two different games with the same opponent, tells you nothing...I mean nothing about their eventual match up. I see advantage South Carolina at home....that could spell the difference...or maybe not. Now..play ball !!!!Not if Uconn plays like they did in 2nd half of game against Tennessee!
It's weird to see a torn ACL injury where the player jogs off the court and jogs into the locker room.
You keep saying that. I'm not sure you know what that means. Why would you think she's a generational talent??? Generational talents are usually head and shoulders above their class (and classes above them). They are consensus #1's coming out of HS at the very least. Easily winning Naismith, etc awards. She didn't do any of that. Jones and Horston were considered better than her.Boston is a generational talent. Would be a huge loss for SC if she is out for a long stretch. She was back on the bench for the 4th quarter with her knee wrapped in ice. So, probably not too serious.
You do realize there is no criteria for being a "generational" player. It's subjective and can be a personal opinion. You can't give an exact measurement so calling someone a generational player can not be disproven or called wrong. Everyone has their own ceiling for what it means...so...yes...to some she is a generational player and has done enough for them to call her one...so let it go people.You keep saying that. I'm not sure you know what that means. Why would you think she's a generational talent??? Generational talents are usually head and shoulders above their class (and classes above them). They are consensus #1's coming out of HS at the very least. Easily winning Naismith, etc awards. She didn't do any of that. Jones and Horston were considered better than her.
Why don't we wait until she has actually done something? Won some NC's. 3-4 time AA. a couple NPOY awards. THEN, we can START to talk about if she's generational or not. Maybe she'll show it her in college career, but certainly up to this point (mostly HS) she hasn't shown anything that would be considered "generational".
Aww, puppies are so cute.
So the BY is opinion based forum which fits nicely with a subjective based personal opinions of "generational talent" or any other words we want to kick around. @BostonBay should defend his personal opinion not just keep throwing it out. People are just not buying it!You do realize there is no criteria for being a "generational" player. It's subjective and can be a personal opinion. You can't give an exact measurement so calling someone a generational player can not be disproven or called wrong. Everyone has their own ceiling for what it means...so...yes...to some she is a generational player and has done enough for them to call her one...so let it go people.
Having no criteria for using the term to describe a players level of ability would to me, be useless. However if it's all subjective as you say, I suppose he/she could be describing the kid as an above average freshman talent. Which would make much more sense.You do realize there is no criteria for being a "generational" player. It's subjective and can be a personal opinion. You can't give an exact measurement so calling someone a generational player can not be disproven or called wrong. Everyone has their own ceiling for what it means...so...yes...to some she is a generational player and has done enough for them to call her one...so let it go people.
That would just mean that they're all playing in the same generation. Which would be true and make sense. However, it certainly doesn't differentiate them. Which would be a pretty hollow compliment.You are correct.. but there can be many "generational" players....just so you know .
You keep saying that. I'm not sure you know what that means. Why would you think she's a generational talent??? Generational talents are usually head and shoulders above their class (and classes above them). They are consensus #1's coming out of HS at the very least. Easily winning Naismith, etc awards. She didn't do any of that. Jones and Horston were considered better than her.
Why don't we wait until she has actually done something? Won some NC's. 3-4 time AA. a couple NPOY awards. THEN, we can START to talk about if she's generational or not. Maybe she'll show it her in college career, but certainly up to this point (mostly HS) she hasn't shown anything that would be considered "generational".


You guys could let it go too. Because it makes no sense.You do realize there is no criteria for being a "generational" player. It's subjective and can be a personal opinion. You can't give an exact measurement so calling someone a generational player can not be disproven or called wrong. Everyone has their own ceiling for what it means...so...yes...to some she is a generational player and has done enough for them to call her one...so let it go people.
Yea, but I'd call her one before I'd call Boston one.Too early to call Paige generational?![]()

"Who" are you takin' about?Yea, but I'd call her one before I'd call Boston one.![]()
"Who" are you takin' about?

Exactly.....so you do get it. I never said she was a generational player....but if someone thinks she is...then she is.....It's subjective. Now a consensus generation player she may not be yet. That's a whole different thing.You guys could let it go too. Because it makes no sense.
Heck if there is no criteria, then I'm a generational player.
Exactly.....so you do get it. I never said she was a generational player....but if someone thinks she is...then she is.....It's subjective. Now a consensus generation player she may not be yet. That's a whole different thing.
![]()
If someone thinks you're a potato, then you are??






So if you combine generational player with potato do you get Spud Webb?![]()
If someone thinks you're a potato, then you are??

What I said had zero to do about Tennessee! It had to do how hard Uconn finally played in a game this year! I don't judge games like you suggest! So know you really don't know what I meant! Last time Uconn played South Carolina on their home court. The Huskies were up 28 at the half and their coach called her first timeout with about a minute left in the first half! Asia Wilson was on that team! So much for home court! Uconn repeated the thumping in the Elite 8 with another 30 pt. lead and Dawn didn't call timeout until right before the half again!…...or if South Carolina plays like they did the first half against Tennessee....this is really a silly way to decide a game that will be played on a basketball court. The two different games with the same opponent, tells you nothing...I mean nothing about their eventual match up. I see advantage South Carolina at home....that could spell the difference...or maybe not. Now..play ball !!!!
SC is a streaky team. They also are a team that knows how to turn the switch on when they need to.Not interested in the "generational" debate - FWIW, WAY too early and I agree with the folks who have said she has LONG way to go before she's even close to being considered that good. What she is, is a very good freshman post player.
SC took it to Tennessee in the first half, more specifically the 1st quarter. Tenn played them close the rest of the way losing each quarter by 3, 5 and 1. UCONN was down at the half, and blew Tennessee out in the 2nd half.
IF SC had played the entire game like the 1st quarter, they'd have won by 40. IF UCONN played Tenn the first half the way we played the 2nd half, we'd have won by 40.
Point is 2 fairly close MOV's. The game vs. SC is AT SC. I think it's a very close game. I think UCONN wins by 4-5 points. But we will see soon enough...