Parker off Olympic team?

[CocoHusky]

Here you go. Candace Parker disappointed, will not be on US hoops roster

"I was surprised, very surprised, but it's tough on her," Parker said. "I was looking forward to this summer. I played well up until this point. Played well in both camps. I felt like my game is still in it's prime."

"I'm disappointed because this is one of the best teams to play USA basketball that I can remember. It hurts a little bit not to be part of it."

In regards to being an alternate: "I'll cross that bridge when it happens," she said. "I'm older and more mature and feel like I take things as they come. They made their decision and I have to respect it."

Very classy and mature response by CP. A great example of how to show disappointment in not being selected and respect of the selection process. CP is a Dyme!

 

[mdakota]

Breaking this down my position:

PG: Bird/Whalen
SG: Taurasi/Augustus
SF: Moore/Catchings/McCoughtry
PF: Charles/EDD/Stewart
C: Griner/Fowles

Augustus's position is somewhat tenuous, given that McCoughtry, and even Moore, could be used as a SG. And McCoughtry's position on the team is tenuous, given that she's probably the 3rd SF on the team.

Then you have the veteran and rookie slots. At this point in their careers, I think it's pretty undeniable that Parker is better than both Catchings and Stewart. But the committee obviously thought Catchings' experience and Stewart's potential were more important than Parker's immense talents. It's a decision you can make with a team this loaded, but I'm not convinced it's the correct one.

Stewart/EDD/Parker could also play the SF... they would definitely cause match-up problems... They all handle like guards... I think CP should be selected over McCoughtry...

 

[UcMiami]

Here you go. Candace Parker disappointed, will not be on US hoops roster

"I was surprised, very surprised, but it's tough on her," Parker said. "I was looking forward to this summer. I played well up until this point. Played well in both camps. I felt like my game is still in it's prime."

"I'm disappointed because this is one of the best teams to play USA basketball that I can remember. It hurts a little bit not to be part of it."

In regards to being an alternate: "I'll cross that bridge when it happens," she said. "I'm older and more mature and feel like I take things as they come. They made their decision and I have to respect it."

A very good article and Candace carries herself with great dignity. Impressive public response to what has to be a huge disappointment. I hope her 'people' can follow her lead and respect the tone she has taken.

 

[stwainfan]

Earvin Magic Johnson ‏@MagicJohnson 16h16 hours ago
I feel @Candace_Parker is the best all around women's basketball player in the world!

222 retweets516 likes

 

[UcMiami]

I just checked the 2015 WNBA all star roster - 9 of the speculative team were all stars with the other three being Fowles (didn't play the first half of the season), Taurasi (didn't play at all) and Stewart (college player.) Parker was also not an all star for the same reason as Sylvia and Diana. Of the centers on the all star team I don't think anyone would argue for either Dolson or Bone over Fowles and I think Lavender would also be a second choice.

A choice of Parker over Fowles is ignoring positional strengths and international players like Liz Cambage who is 6'8" 218 pounds - Sylvia is 6'6" 200, Griner is 6'9" 208, Charles is 6'4" 198, and Parker is 6'4" 175 - if for some reason USA needs low post defense (fouls or injury) Parker is not the answer so the issue was never about that comparison. This is not an unusual selection weighting for USA basketball - they carried Dolson and Lavender to the very end in 2014 waiting on word on Griner, they carried Jones in 2012 specifically to have a third option (which they definitely needed), they had Appel in 2010 as the third option. USA fears the low post and likes to carry three players in that position.

The players that most clearly fall into that tweener area are Catchings, EDD, Augustus, and Stewart. All of them shoot more than Parker and for higher percentages from the arc (which is very important in international competition as the men found out a few times), and Catchings is the only one to shoot a significantly lower overall percentage. And if you ranked them on defense, I suspect Parker would be at the bottom. Stewart obviously has the least experience but probably the highest upside.

Again - I am pretty shocked, and I probably would have traded Catchings for Parker straight up. I fully understand the post/power forward selections, I fully understand the guard rotation, and I am fine with Stewart being included. Augustus to me is a different player than the others and I think I understand her inclusion as well. To me it really comes down to Catch/EDD/CP and someone was going to scream about any one of those being left out. I think fans would probably scream least about Catchings being dropped, but I suspect the players might be most shocked by her being left out.

 

[stwainfan]

What where these folks watching not to pick one of the best to ever play?

 

[Blueconn]

Is the roster actually being announced tomorrow ? This has been stated by many but do we know for certain ? If so, and if it's televised, I'm taking the day off and making popcorn. The Q&A gonna be a first rate affair...featuring committee folks who ain't used to being treated like they're in a witness box.

 

[HuskyNan]

Earvin Magic Johnson ‏@MagicJohnson 16h16 hours ago
I feel @Candace_Parker is the best all around women's basketball player in the world!

222 retweets516 likes

Do you see anyone in this thread that claims Parker isn't a good player? We get it, already.

 

[Vowelguy]

Is the roster actually being announced tomorrow ?

Yes.

 

[pacific 44]

If there was a write in campaign for Candace's inclusion and only Uconn fans were allowed to vote, i guarantee she would be on the team.It would be like the Kohler faucet ad where a faucet is shown and someone says "build a house around it." I view Candace as one of the players that the team should be built around and if she isn't on the team i will find her omission very disappointing.

 

[UcMiami]

Is the roster actually being announced tomorrow ? This has been stated by many but do we know for certain ? If so, and if it's televised, I'm taking the day off and making popcorn. The Q&A gonna be a first rate affair...featuring committee folks who ain't used to being treated like they're in a witness box.

They just put out a press release - not likely any Q&A at all.

 

[stwainfan]

Do you see anyone in this thread that claims Parker isn't a good player? We get it, already.

I know that. It just makes no sense to leave her off that's all.

 

[hoophuskee]

I just checked the 2015 WNBA all star roster - 9 of the speculative team were all stars with the other three being Fowles (didn't play the first half of the season), Taurasi (didn't play at all) and Stewart (college player.) Parker was also not an all star for the same reason as Sylvia and Diana. Of the centers on the all star team I don't think anyone would argue for either Dolson or Bone over Fowles and I think Lavender would also be a second choice.

A choice of Parker over Fowles is ignoring positional strengths and international players like Liz Cambage who is 6'8" 218 pounds - Sylvia is 6'6" 200, Griner is 6'9" 208, Charles is 6'4" 198, and Parker is 6'4" 175 - if for some reason USA needs low post defense (fouls or injury) Parker is not the answer so the issue was never about that comparison.

The players that most clearly fall into that tweener area are Catchings, EDD, Augustus, and Stewart. All of them shoot more than Parker and for higher percentages from the arc (which is very important in international competition as the men found out a few times), and Catchings is the only one to shoot a significantly lower overall percentage. And if you ranked them on defense, I suspect Parker would be at the bottom. Stewart obviously has the least experience but probably the highest upside.

Again - I am pretty shocked, . To me it really comes down to Catch/EDD/CP and someone was going to scream about any one of those being left out. I think fans would probably scream least about Catchings being dropped, but I suspect the players might be most shocked by her being left out.

I disagree with most of the post other than being shocked.

Not ignoring positional strengths just believe with Griner and Tina that we don't need to worry about the strength as much as you suggest. Have seen many times "heavier/bigger players" get run out of the gym or even outplayed? Saw it 1st hand with BS. How many times did we have to year over the past year or two "pound the ball inside vs Stewart and UCONN?" or "Shouldn't we want Stewart as a wing because she won't get so banged up?" Give me Griner and Charles any day every day over Liz. When we run them out of the gym they can keep trying to play halfcourt basketball and work the clock to get it inside all they want.

But as you say it's not about "position" of Parker vs Fowles- it imo should be about if you have Parker as the 2nd team playmaker like she was back in the Olympics, with players like Angel and Whelan on defense and scorers such as Maya, or Augustus or EDD playing alongside her, she MAKES THEM BETTER with her skillset. Parker at the 4 and Griner at he 5 and you surround them with shooters would be awesome.

And there is no way no how EDD is a better defender than Parker. Nor do I believe Augustus is. OFC I don't think Stewie is but Stewie isn't the issue. Further when we talk about "efficiencies" - sure Parker isn't a shooter. But what Parker is - she is much more of a facilitator imo than any of the aforementioned. If she isn't that good defensively and isn't that good of a shooter than how can anyone say she is among the world's best? The reason is she has a phenom handle and can get anywhere to facilitate. For her size that is a huge advantage.

Again I'm shocked too - I agree there. It's just thatimo Fowles or Angel can be replaced by other palyer's on the team. The team that has amazing versatitlity.

 

[mkwstar23]

Did someone really ask why Bird will be on the team instead of Sims and Diggins or Sloot?...the point guard for the Olympic team will always be a pass first and pass second and pass again player...Sloot is the only one that fits that bill...but does not seem to show the passion need to lead ateam of stars...for Diggins and Sims to be at their best they have to have the ball all the time...with Maya and DT and EDD the perimeter shooting is covered...as far Angel i am not a fan at all But when she plays for Geno that selfishness is not seen...and she always contributes...back to the original question Bird is still a better point guard than the other three, as is Whalen and both have won a lot more on the big stage than those competing with them, i personally believe that Sims is the best of PG's in waiting

 

[hoophuskee]

Isn't characterizing this as a "snub", without knowing the thinking behind it another example of "Harmful speculation" All we have right now are her comments, her coach's tweet and an article written by a team reporter. Shouldn't we wait to hear USAB's side of the decision before declaring this a "snub"?

How harmful is it to call it a snub until you hear more? Surely USAB would have expected it wouldn't they? Yet no response yet- maybe they shouldn't until they announce all the team. Hopefully they address it. But until then what is the harm of FANS -- I repeat the word "FANS" -- to call it a snub as of right now if they feel that it is? Does it really matter to you that much that another fan call it a snub? This IS news. Don't prevent some of the FANS being FANS by using the word "Snub."

 

[HuskyNan]

How harmful is it to call it a snub until you hear more? Surely USAB would have expected it wouldn't they? Yet no response yet- maybe they shouldn't until they announce all the team. Hopefully they address it. But until then what is the harm of FANS -- I repeat the word "FANS" -- to call it a snub as of right now if they feel that it is? Does it really matter to you that much that another fan call it a snub? This IS news. Don't prevent some of the FANS being FANS by using the word "Snub."

I changed the phrasing of my post just to remove one more thing that people can argue about.

It never ceases to amaze me that, in a thread where 99% of the people are in agreement there could be so many posts from folks looking for an argument.

 

[Plebe]

If there was a write in campaign for Candace's inclusion and only Uconn fans were allowed to vote, i guarantee she would be on the team.It would be like the Kohler faucet ad where a faucet is shown and someone says "build a house around it." I view Candace as one of the players that the team should be built around and if she isn't on the team i will find her omission very disappointing.

Many people are, like Candace, surprised and disappointed. But we would do well to remind ourselves that it's for good reason that national team selections are not conducted in the same manner as NBA or WNBA all-star team voting.

Lin Dunn made the valuable point that USA Basketball has, by virtue of winning 5 consecutive gold medals, earned the right to be trusted to make difficult personnel decisions. The selection committee has a wealth of insight, and the rest of us are not privy to the discussions that are informed by that insight.

But I'm still so deeply saddened by the pall that this controversy is casting over the public perception of the national team roster announcement, an occasion that should be a celebration of the sport we love and the players we admire.

 

[Alydar]

How harmful is it to call it a snub until you hear more? Surely USAB would have expected it wouldn't they? Yet no response yet- maybe they shouldn't until they announce all the team. Hopefully they address it. But until then what is the harm of FANS -- I repeat the word "FANS" -- to call it a snub as of right now if they feel that it is? Does it really matter to you that much that another fan call it a snub? This IS news. Don't prevent some of the FANS being FANS by using the word "Snub."

My comment was in the apparent double standard. On the one hand the poster was telling everyone to refrain from harmful speculation and negative phrases after using one herself. "Snub" has all sorts of connotations and suggests all sorts of inferences. How can anyone characterise this decision until both sides have their say?

Personally I'm perfectly comfortable with a free-for-all thread with no-holds barred. But I don't make the rules, the Admin does.

 

[HuskyNan]

My comment was in the apparent double standard. On the one hand the poster was telling everyone to refrain from harmful speculation and negative phrases after using one herself. "Snub" has all sorts of connotations and suggests all sorts of inferences. How can anyone characterise this decision until both sides have their say?

I changed the word "snub" to "left off the roster".

I'm not sure what you mean by both sides. Both sides of what? People that want to call Candace Parker names or cast aspersions on her character and people that don't?

 

[UcMiami]

I disagree with most of the post other than being shocked.

Not ignoring positional strengths just believe with Griner and Tina that we don't need to worry about the strength as much as you suggest. Have seen many times "heavier/bigger players" get run out of the gym or even outplayed? Saw it 1st hand with BS. How many times did we have to year over the past year or two "pound the ball inside vs Stewart and UCONN?" or "Shouldn't we want Stewart as a wing because she won't get so banged up?" Give me Griner and Charles any day every day over Liz. When we run them out of the gym they can keep trying to play halfcourt basketball and work the clock to get it inside all they want.

But as you say it's not about "position" of Parker vs Fowles- it imo should be about if you have Parker as the 2nd team playmaker like she was back in the Olympics, with players like Angel and Whelan on defense and scorers such as Maya, or Augustus or EDD playing alongside her, she MAKES THEM BETTER with her skillset. Parker at the 4 and Griner at he 5 and you surround them with shooters would be awesome.

And there is no way no how EDD is a better defender than Parker. Nor do I believe Augustus is. OFC I don't think Stewie is but Stewie isn't the issue. Further when we talk about "efficiencies" - sure Parker isn't a shooter. But what Parker is - she is much more of a facilitator imo than any of the aforementioned. If she isn't that good defensively and isn't that good of a shooter than how can anyone say she is among the world's best? The reason is she has a phenom handle and can get anywhere to facilitate. For her size that is a huge advantage.

Again I'm shocked too - I agree there. It's just thatimo Fowles or Angel can be replaced by other palyer's on the team. The team that has amazing versatitlity.

We can agree to disagree on this - but the history of USA basketball for the last 7 years under Geno is they want three post defenders and Parker, EDD, Stewart do not qualify as post defenders on the international stage. This isn't about most of the teams in the Olympics it is about matching up with a few specific teams including Australia, France, and Spain.

 

[mdakota]

I haven't been online since Friday, so I had no idea what was going on... But for the majority of the weekend, while waiting for Game of Thrones to come on... I have been watching the 2012 Olympics and the 2014 FIBA Women's World Championship in Turkey...

Parker was a great teammate and contributor in the Olympics...

 

[GiladKatzDeli]

Tina Thompson was an outstanding player, a pioneer in the W who played consistently and capably into the modern era.
She has earned and deserves our respect for her views.
I'm looking forward to seeing her continue to assist the Texas team in the seasons to come.

She was a consistently good player and had a long career in the WNBA, but in my opinion was never outstanding. In fact, was probably only the 3rd best player on her own Comets team (Swoopes and Cooper). Not her fault, but her career stats and accomplishments were boosted by her extremely long career (a compiler of stats). I'm not saying her opinion doesn't matter, but she's hastily placing this decision solely at Geno's feet and I think that's unfair.

 

[Alydar]

I changed the word "snub" to "left off the roster".

I'm not sure what you mean by both sides. Both sides of what? People that want to call Candace Parker names or cast aspersions on her character and people that don't?

I thought I was clear. Up to this point I have seen an article written by a Sparks beat writer, a tweet by her coach and her own comments. The "other side" I was referring to is USA basketball. I'll refrain from characterising their decision until they announce their team and have a chance to explain their thinking.

 

[vtcwbuff]

I changed the phrasing of my post just to remove one more thing that people can argue about.

It never ceases to amaze me that, in a post where 99% of the people are in agreement there could be so many posts from folks looking for an argument.

Put on your hip waders and take a trip to the dark (orange) side. No arguments there. Gino did it because he hates UTenn.

 

[EricLA]

FWIW, I think we need to wait to see what the mouthpiece of US Basketball says. It's clear Parker was as surprised as anyone and she's certainly been very classy about it, while obviously being very disappointed. It's pretty clear she's not concerned about the Zika virus - at least from her tweets, as she made no mention of it. So now it falls on USA basketball to address the controversy. Will they? I have no idea and hope they are asked a lot of questions about it.

Like Nan, I find it sort of amusing that a topic where 99% of the posts are all in agreement that leaving Parker off is mystifying at the very least, that there can be so much snark. It seems to me that the 2 players most often mentioned as "should have" for being left off the team in favor of Parker are Angel and Sylvia. The other 2 players not mentioned as much are Catch and Siemone.

I can't speculate at all to the reasons. Parker was on the 2012 Olympic team and while not a starter, played quite well. She seemed to play within the team concept, so I can't speak to that, especially since i was not at practices, and did not see the games live. I certainly understand the Tenn fans frustration. I can also understand where it seems like a bias in favor of UCONN, which I think is also unfair.

I think the USA Basketball Committee needs to address this, regardless if their policy is to "not discuss players who did or did not make the team". This is a unique situation and while I don't know what the fallout will be, the emotions and opinions will certainly not go away by ignoring the situation....