Kelly Faris and All American consideration

[jplotinus]

Many, maybe most AAs are voted before the NC.

I don't dispute that. In fact, you could have elaborated on that point, had you chosen to develop it through to its logical conclusion. Perhaps you care to do so and provide additional insight for us?

Here's what's needed:

1-Posting of the NCAA tournament schedule;
2-ditto the various AA team announcements, with particular noticing of the AP announcement, the one that counts for Husky of Honor wall posting, I believe.

So long as UCONN is still in the hunt when the various announcements are made Kelis Fisher might have a chance because there's nothing worse than an AA team that leaves out the player who is a standout on the last team standing.

No one likes to be asked: "what were you thinking?" -- right, Icebear?

 

[Icebear]

I don't dispute that. In fact, you could have elaborated on that point, had you chosen to develop it through to its logical conclusion. Perhaps you care to do so and provide additional insight for us?

Here's what's needed:

1-Posting of the NCAA tournament schedule;
2-ditto the various AA team announcements, with particular noticing of the AP announcement, the one that counts for Husky of Honor wall posting, I believe.

So long as UCONN is still in the hunt when the various announcements are made Kelis Fisher might have a chance because there's nothing worse than an AA team that leaves out the player who is a standout on the last team standing.

No one likes to be asked: "what were you thinking?" -- right, Icebear?

I never mind being asked a question. Off the top of my head I can't remember which are and are not voted before the tournament. The AA teams voted on by coaches are Kelly's best chance. Most coaches know what Kelly brings to the game every night.

 

[meyers7]

In Duke game ESPN coverage, as Kelly was on her way to an impressive double-double, while simultaneously playing shut-down defense against the vaunted Chelsea Gray, Rebecca Lobo asked "should Kelly Faris receive AA consideration?"

Answer: "No"

Rebecca followed up with "consieration at least?"

Still no positive response.

That is not right. If Kelly continues her present path of stellar all around play, and shut-down defense of opponents' best player, game in and game out, AA honors should follow. There was no basis for a "No" answer on a national telecast, no less, when Kelly had just posted a double/double and when Chelsea Gray was sitting on the bench looking like a deer in the path of oncoming headlights.

In the Rebecca - Pam exchange, after Pam says" Probably not, and that's a shame"
Rebecca - "She should....she should."
Pam - She's certainly one of the best all-around players in the country"
Rebecca - "She should at least get consideration"

Let's be fair to Pam Ward. Her answer wasn't. "No." It was., "Probably not, and that's a shame." It was not negative against Kelly at all and more a comment of how others neglect Kelly's contributions.

So at the very least jplot, you were misleading (and that's putting it nicely). We all love Faris, but you are not endearing yourself here much with these kind of posts.

 

[slimmer56]

Kelly Faris was chiseled out of cave in Middle Indiana ! Not just to play bball, but to play for UCONN & Geno Auriemma. That freakin' place was as wild as I have ever seen it. When Geno chest-bumped Kelly the whole place, the bench, and myself erupted. Kelly Faris is an All-American , and will be a high pick in the WNBA draft. Why wouldn't she be ? As a coach all you have to do is point out which player you want to stop 1-4, and unleash Kelly on her.

I was so happy and excited that 2nd half. By God if we didn't look like the UCONN of old. I think they proved something to themselves too. Bring on ND !
GO UCONN GO

 

[jplotinus]

So at the very least jplot, you were misleading (and that's putting it nicely). We all love Faris, but you are not endearing yourself here much with these kind of posts.

Oh joy, another claim of "etiquette" violation. I don't have a tape of the segment, as I imagine you do, as you appear to have quoted it in detail.

As a matter if etiquette, then, and In order properly to resolve this conundrum, permit me to politely request you post the segment in the thread via YouTube, assuming there's a legally postable version to be had. I posted from memory of the moment, as this is a friendly chat and not a formal hearing in the Star Chamber. As I sit here today, I remember the exchange as I posted it. I accurately recounted the impression it made on me. Granted, my hearing may have been selective. It was, afterall, a basketball game.

Perhaps the dialogue is as you say it it is but that is not how it struck me at the time.

Unless and until you post a YouTube version, this matter will remain unresolved. After you post it and I listen to it in the light of day and on the basis of reason, I may recant,confess,plead guilty or stand firm as the case may be.

 

[Icebear]

Unless and until you post a YouTube version, this matter will remain unresolved. After you post it and I listen to it in the light of day and on the basis of reason, I may recant,confess,plead guilty or stand firm as the case may be.

Two of us posted it verbatim and exactly the same. It is done.

 

[Ozzie Nelson]

Oh joy, another claim of "etiquette" violation. I don't have a tape of the segment, as I imagine you do, as you appear to have quoted it in detail.

As a matter if etiquette, then, and In order properly to resolve this conundrum, permit me to politely request you post the segment in the thread via YouTube, assuming there's a legally postable version to be had. I posted from memory of the moment, as this is a friendly chat and not a formal hearing in the Star Chamber. As I sit here today, I remember the exchange as I posted it. I accurately recounted the impression it made on me. Granted, my hearing may have been selective. It was, afterall, a basketball game.

Perhaps the dialogue is as you say it it is but that is not how it struck me at the time.

Unless and until you post a YouTube version, this matter will remain unresolved. After you post it and I listen to it in the light of day and on the basis of reason, I may recant,confess,plead guilty or stand firm as the case may be.

You are wrong. Give it up. Many of us have a DVR, and therein resides the proof.

 

[DishNSwish]

Graham Hays and I were discussing this last night...we were kind of leaning toward an off the cuff idea of second team All-American.

 

[jplotinus]

Two of us posted it verbatim and exactly the same. It is done.

So long as we're having a friendly chat, the claimed verbatim posting is ok for discussion. But, IMHO, if there's a need to prove me wrong or to lay a claim of violation of this, that or the other, then, in that event, hearing is believing.

Transcript is limited. It doesn't convey tone, tenor or pauses that cause one statement of "probably not" to sound very different from another one.

You agree?

 

[bruinbball]

The WBCA State Farm team is ten players. Can anyone name 10 players they would rather have night in night out to make your team and the other players around them better while doing everything necessary to help your team win games?

 

[alexrgct]

There are some critical games coming up: Baylor, ND in South Bend, BET. Those also have the advantage of being late in the season. If Kelly shines in those games like she did against Duke, we may see a change of thinking as far as AA consideration. No one who watched the Duke game came away thinking there was a better player on the floor that particular night, and that game had multiple AA candidates. If she keeps it up, she will become the first AA who never had a chance of being an AA.

 

[Icebear]

So long as we're having a friendly chat, the claimed verbatim posting is ok for discussion. But, IMHO, if there's a need to prove me wrong or to lay a claim of violation of this, that or the other, then, in that event, hearing is believing.

Transcript is limited. It doesn't convey tone, tenor or pauses that cause one statement of "probably not" to sound very different from another one.

You agree?

Yes, I can be limiting. Hearing Ward it was clear she was not deriding or criticizing Kelly at all. Your comment per Ward that she simply said, "No," did not capture that essense, especially, with her additional phrase, "and that's a shame," which was significant. That fact is all I was adding to be fair to Ward. Nothing more.

 

[alexrgct]

The WBCA State Farm team is ten players. Can anyone name 10 players they would rather have night in night out to make your team and the other players around them better while doing everything necessary to help your team win games?

No

 

[jplotinus]

You are wrong. Give it up. Many of us have a DVR, and therein resides the proof.

What's the matter? Did I offend you or your sensibilities?

If so post up a confession you'd like for me to sign. So long as I don't have to face a firing squad or do time in the slam, I'll sign the darn confession. Then, perhaps, we can move on and lobby for Kelis Fisher 1st team AA.

Do we have an accord, or do you wanna go to war?

 

[bruinbball]

So long as we're having a friendly chat, the claimed verbatim posting is ok for discussion. But, IMHO, if there's a need to prove me wrong or to lay a claim of violation of this, that or the other, then, in that event, hearing is believing.

Transcript is limited. It doesn't convey tone, tenor or pauses that cause one statement of "probably not" to sound very different from another one.

You agree?

Rebecca: "Do you think Kelly Faris has any shot to be an All-American?"
Pam: "Probably not and that's a shame"
Rebecca: "Should be.....should be."
Pam: "Certainly one of the best all-around players in the country"
Rebecca - "She should at least get consideration"

I think it is pretty clear their tone was one of under-appreciation for Kelly by the award voting powers that be. For you to hear it any other way...leads me to the glass half empty tone of your posts in recent history - maybe it is just your mindset.

 

[Icebear]

There are some critical games coming up: Baylor, ND in South Bend, BET. Those also have the advantage of being late in the season. If Kelly shines in those games like she did against Duke, we may see a change of thinking as far as AA consideration. No one who watched the Duke game came away thinking there was a better player on the floor that particular night, and that game had multiple AA candidates. If she keeps it up, she will become the first AA who never had a chance of being an AA.

I have dreams of Faris shutting down Griner by just taking away her legs. Then they would be the same size.

 

[jplotinus]

Yes, I can be limiting. Hearing Ward it was clear she was not deriding or criticizing Kelly at all. Your comment per Ward that she simply said, "No," did not capture that essense, especially, with her additional phrase, "and that's a shame," which was significant. That fact is all I was adding to be fair to Ward. Nothing more.

No offense, but i distinctly did not hear it the way you did. I am sorry if it offends someone if I heard it differently.

 

[Icebear]

No offense, but i distinctly did not hear it the way you did. I am sorry if it offends someone if I heard it differently.

As bruin said that is probably more about you. Nothing I posted was a criticism of you either. Just giving Ward her credit for what she said.

 

[jplotinus]

Rebecca: "Do you think Kelly Faris has any shot to be an All-American?"
Pam: "Probably not and that's a shame"
Rebecca: "Should be.....should be."
Pam: "Certainly one of the best all-around players in the country"
Rebecca - "She should at least get consideration"

I think it is pretty clear their tone was one of under-appreciation for Kelly by the award voting powers that be. For you to hear it any other way...leads me to the glass half empty tone of your posts in recent history - maybe it is just your mindset.

No you are wrong to claim something about tone, as that requires hearing, not a claimed interpretation.

See, I can also use the word "wrong". Mind you, I don't relish doing that and would rather move on. But, since you find it necessary to judge my posts, well, game on.

 

[HuskyNan]

No you are wrong to claim something about tone, as that requires hearing, not a claimed interpretation.

See, I can also use the word "wrong". Mind you, I don't relish doing that and would rather move on. But, since you find it necessary to judge my posts, well, game on.

I agree with bruin and ice. I didn't hear Ward putting Kelly down, just giving her opinion on how she thought the voters would go on the subject of Kelly getting votes.

 

[bruinbball]

No you are wrong to claim something about tone, as that requires hearing, not a claimed interpretation.

See, I can also use the word "wrong". Mind you, I don't relish doing that and would rather move on. But, since you find it necessary to judge my posts, well, game on.

I heard Pam's tone in the 5 times I listened to transcribe the conversation. It didn't change once

 

[jplotinus]

As bruin said that is probably more about you. Nothing I posted was a criticism of you either. Just giving Ward her credit for what she said.

Nothing I posted was intended as a criticism of Ward. I didn't even name her. The issue I had in mind was that which was expressed in the thread title "KELLY FARIS AND ALL AMERICAN CONSIDERATION".

Let me be clear. I have no problem with Pam Ward or any of the ESPN commercials that ran before or after I heard "No" when others only heard "probably not."

 

[bruinbball]

Nothing I posted was intended as a criticism of Ward. I didn't even name her. The issue I had in mind was that which was expressed in the thread title "KELLY FARIS AND ALL AMERICAN CONSIDERATION".

Let me be clear. I have no problem with Pam Ward or any of the ESPN commercials that ran before or after I heard "No" when others only heard "probably not."

The thing is, you didn't hear 'No'. She never said that. Don't get me wrong, I agree with the basis of your argument that ruling Kelly out of contention before the votes are tallied is wrong, but this is not what was done. It was Ward's opinion that it will probably not happen, while Rebecca confirm she should be twice....but I don't feel the need to copy the entire discussion again.

 

[jplotinus]

The thing is, you didn't hear 'No'. She never said that. Don't get me wrong, I agree with the basis of your argument that ruling Kelly out of contention before the votes are tallied is wrong, but this is not what was done. It was Ward's opinion that it will probably not happen, while Rebecca confirm she should be twice....but I don't feel the need to copy the entire discussion again.

Let me double check for accuracy of understanding. I think a post showed up that acknowledged Ward did reply "no" prior to or after the "probably not" segment. But, perhaps that post was edited?

In any event, my recollection is what it is. If I'm wrong I'm wrong.

Blessings to all

 

[jplotinus]

I agree with bruin and ice. I didn't hear Ward putting Kelly down, just giving her opinion on how she thought the voters would go on the subject of Kelly getting votes.

Hi Nan,

Separate and apart from Ward's intent, which I'm not questioning, did you hear a reply consisting in a "no"? That is what I remember hearing.

Thanks

 

[speedoo]

There are some critical games coming up: Baylor, ND in South Bend, BET. Those also have the advantage of being late in the season. If Kelly shines in those games like she did against Duke, we may see a change of thinking as far as AA consideration. No one who watched the Duke game came away thinking there was a better player on the floor that particular night, and that game had multiple AA candidates. If she keeps it up, she will become the first AA who never had a chance of being an AA.

Kelly has unfinished business with ND, as she herself has said, as she failed to contain McBride in UConn's only loss.. Would love to see her and her team mates make Diggins' senior night miserable.

 

[Icebear]

Hi Nan,

Separate and apart from Ward's intent, which I'm not questioning, did you hear a reply consisting in a "no"? That is what I remember hearing.

Thanks

There was no, "No," it doesn't exist. There were two of us who gave the exact verbatim of the statement and exchange.

 

[blackbird]

I have a little more faith in the voters than most do. Last season, Bria got on an All American team because they noted how well she had performed against the best teams. Kelly is doing that this season. And we're winning most of them. If she keeps it up, I think she'll make a team.

For a 5 player team, obviously the problem is that four spots are already taken up (Sims, Diggins, Oguemeka and Griner.) But who deserves the fifth spot more than Kelly?

 

[DishNSwish]

I have a little more faith in the voters than most do. Last season, Bria got on an All American team because they noted how well she had performed against the best teams. Kelly is doing that this season. And we're winning most of them. If she keeps it up, I think she'll make a team.

For a 5 player team, obviously the problem is that four spots are already taken up (Sims, Diggins, Oguemeka and Griner.) But who deserves the fifth spot more than Kelly?

Delle Donne.

 

[AndyCT]

Oh joy, another claim of "etiquette" violation. I don't have a tape of the segment, as I imagine you do, as you appear to have quoted it in detail.

As a matter if etiquette, then, and In order properly to resolve this conundrum, permit me to politely request you post the segment in the thread via YouTube, assuming there's a legally postable version to be had. I posted from memory of the moment, as this is a friendly chat and not a formal hearing in the Star Chamber. As I sit here today, I remember the exchange as I posted it. I accurately recounted the impression it made on me. Granted, my hearing may have been selective. It was, afterall, a basketball game.

Perhaps the dialogue is as you say it it is but that is not how it struck me at the time.

Unless and until you post a YouTube version, this matter will remain unresolved. After you post it and I listen to it in the light of day and on the basis of reason, I may recant,confess,plead guilty or stand firm as the case may be.

Not a question of etiquette but rather integrity.

I’m no fan of Pam Ward but you have to be fair – she did not say “No.” What Ward said was, “Probably not and that’s a shame,” which is a whole different spin than “No.”

She followed that with, “Certainly one of the best all-around players in the country…”

And after Rebecca said, “At least deserves consideration,” Pam followed with “Yep…again you look at her numbers on this team, in double figures scoring, leads them in assists, leads them in steals, second in the nation in assist-to-turnover ratio, does all those things, plays as hard in the 39th minute as she does in the first minute.”

That really can’t be characterized as “still no positive response” – quite the opposite, it sounds like Pam Ward gets how valuable Kelly is. Ward had nothing but praise for Kelly all night long.

And since you apparently have internet access, you don’t need a Youtube clip. The entire game is on ESPN3, and this particular discussion occurs about 1:55 into the game with just under a minute left.