The numbers are a quantifiable way of determining who most impacted the game and therefore should not be dismissed. If you are suggesting that Gabby impacted the game more by stats not presented here or even "intangibles" I would argue that Gabby had more of an opportunity as measure by a very tangible stat-time on the court or MPG. One and done? I did not realize that years spent on campus was a criteria for the WoH.
Absolutely!Do you really think Azura played anywhere near as hard as Gabby?
Do you really think Azura played anywhere near as hard as Gabby? No, she did not will not. Gabby was better because she was a better teammate because she played harder
The WBCA has always had a ten member first team since it started in the 70s.I'm pretty sure back in her day they didn't award 10 players 1st team A/A status - they only gave it to 5. As a result, she would've been on the wall in the more modern era.
The WBCA has always had a ten member first team since it started in the 70s.
I don't have an opinion one way or another but I'm curious about what makes you believe one player put in more effort than another.
Scouts look at effort. How do they know one player played harder than another? How about watching the games? Unless you're blind, it's easy to see that Gabby played much harder. Clean your glasses.
Absolutely!
I did go back and watch the games. Azura, always always always played just as hard as Gabby.If you think Azura played as hard as Gabby, go back and watch the games. She never played as hard as Gabby. Never, ever, ever.