And they won because she was less of a ball hog, though her misses were still on really bad decisions. I could tell she was about to miss before ball cleared her finger tips. In two years if she learns to pass those up, she will be a winning force. Mabbrey and Lou helped put her in position for good shots. It was an enjoyable game.
They also won because she made most of her shots. All of the cherry and nit picking about Arike on here is overshadowing the fact that Phoenix lost to a team that should've beaten.
Always impressed by some posters abilities to find negatives in posters who complain about players they don't like. We sometime complain about players we do like.
Dont think DT is 100%, from her back injury.
Arike was great and played better than normal. She's great when she shoots 13-19, good when she is 9-19, and a liability at 4-19. She's a good shooter when in rhythm. If I were the coach, I'd limit her to 1-2 circus shots per game.
Here is a link that has replays of 2 of 3 of Lou's blocks in the game. The one I am concerned with is the 2nd video.
go.nba.com
Yes, it’s true, but Arike has been a low percentage shooter. She hasn’t cornered the market, but historically she has more than her share. The 4-19 games come too often, and the 13-19 games are too infrequent. Let’s see how she does going forward. She’s certainly exciting, but she’s not a great player if she averages only 40% for the season. She’s not my favorite player, but still, I’d like to see her maximize her talent.
Better be careful on where you draw the line for a great player. Taurasi is at .433 for her career and Bird at .429. That's not that much above 40%.
It is a style of play that is questioned. Think how good Arike might be if she had gone to UConn.
I see your point and accept that it happens. But it can also be true that "some posters" don't like a player because of the negatives "they don't like". We all have some bias, but not all let that bias color their perception for ill or for good.
