Sarah Strong - A Generational Talent | Page 3 | The Boneyard

Sarah Strong - A Generational Talent

oldude said:
In February, during one of his press gaggles, Geno was talking about DT’s retirement, when he compared her to Sarah. The gist of his remarks were that as freshmen both DT & Sarah were somewhat reserved, not wanting to outshine the upperclassmen.

But there was an inevitable moment during practice when everyone in the gym realized that they (DT & Sarah) were the best players in the gym. Consider for a moment the players who would have also been in the gym when DT & Sarah were freshmen.
Expand ...
This is exactly what I was referencing. He is talking about how good they are, not that DT and SS have comparable styles...as opposed to his comment that Sarah is Charles Barkley, in which he was obviously comparing style of play.
 
Here is the thing about Sarah: She's got all the skills (amazing hands, feel for the basket, great great rebounder, great shooter from all 3 levels, composed under pressure, great passer, moves around the basket, great hand eye coordination which allows her to steal balls, great positional defender, great help defender, quick, strong, etc.). All she needs to improve on is gain more experience and practice public speaking. I don't know that we had such a player in WBB since Maya Moore (and Sarah is a better passer than Maya).
 
HuskyNan said:
None. Do you want us to calculate how many points she has vs WNBA players instead?
Expand ...
Yes, please, I’d love to see that stat. I am very excited to see Blanca in tv, and hopefully in person, this year!
 
.-.
Bone Dog said:
This is more or less true. The problem is we’ve seen so little of her game.

In the games we did get to see, Ayanna was an immovable object in the low post on defense, a fierce rebounder, scored mainly on putbacks, had quick feet and she ran the floor well for a big. And she can finish at the rim in transition.

But she has no midrange game in the halfcourt offense to speak of. She is not an equivalent talent to what Aaliyah was. Or even what Kiah Stokes was, though she might be able to develop similarly over the next couple seasons.

Still, if she merely begins in the same place she did freshman year this fall, but avoids injury, she may provide valuable post depth and maybe even an anchor for the small-ball lineup next to Sarah. Plus, she has some understanding of Geno’s schemes that could be invaluable.
Expand ...
Don't you love how Kiah Stokes has developed as a pro?!
 
uconnfan68 said:
Other than rebounding and scoring?
Expand ...
sure but SS is so much more
imho what makes her great is she can score inside,
mid range,3 pt guard all 5 positions
while an all time great never had the versatilyi
of SS
honestly no one in the women’s game that
i see her comparable to
 
HuskyNan said:
None. Do you want us to calculate how many points she has vs WNBA players instead?
Expand ...
More than 1000 in 4 years because I have to say that pretty much all the players of the Italian basketball league can play in the Big East conference and that she is playing against them since she was 14 against players at least 6 years older than her... We can open a discussion about her impact in games against top programs in her freshman year... For the rest Uconn picked the best one available
 
The term "generational talent" is way over used. All the players on the list are very good if not great basketball players but not generational talents. Michael Jordan was a generational talent, DT was a generational talent but the others on the list were just really good players that played on very good teams. They all had the "it" factor when the game was on the line but none of them other than DT (in my opinion) changed the game of basketball and that is my opinion of how you beome a "generational talent".

Sarah is a great player but she hasn't had to carry the load for the team to this point so anything other than her being a good player would be very premature. You can't be generational when you aren't even the best in game at the current time which nobody outside of Storrs things of Sarah. She is great, she might end up being one of the greats to play at UConn but right now it is too soon to put any more pressure than that on her shoulders.

I am a huge fan of UConn and have been as long as WCBB has had Geno so it isn't about being a hater, it is just about being measured in my eveluation of what a player has contributed, at least so far. In the end I hope she is the greatest of all time and changes that game and if that happens I will be the first to serve up some crow and enjoy her accomplishments.
 
"Generational" is ESPN's lazy writing.. Ever notice they throw that tag on someone every year? Same way they automatically call a team "stunned" if they lose as the favorite.

These are just symptoms of a company that tries to do everything but comes up short on many things (e.g., recruiting news, inspiring journalism, even putting in the effort on articles would be nice).
 
.-.
Rowdy831 said:
You can't be generational when you aren't even the best in game at the current time which nobody outside of Storrs things of Sarah.
Expand ...
I don’t mean to pick, since I share your doubts about the term ‘generational,’ as well as your concern about judging players prematurely. We all have hopes about Sarah, and some of them might be fulfilled. But it’s too early to anoint her. There will be plenty of time for that over the next few years.

I’m just wondering how Diana seemed during and after her freshman season. In hindsight, it’s easy to see the seeds of her eventual career. But she was merely a rotation player at first. It took an injury to get her a starting spot. And like Lou Gehrig, there was no looking back once she was in the starting lineup. Sarah had a slightly smoother path to that lineup, though injuries did have an indirect role in it. Had Ayanna and Carol not been out of competition, Sarah may have had to wait at least a little while to reveal her virtues. Those virtues are still unfolding and we don’t know exactly where they’ll lead her and UConn.

I will gladly wait with you to see what actually unfolds and share a bit of that crow pie.
 
As I stated in my OP, the term “generational talent” is overused. I also indicated a more subtle definition of the term to indicate “an athlete doing remarkable things at a level that we’ve never quite seen before.” On that basis, I stand by my OP that DT, Maya, Stewie, Paige & Sarah all qualify as generational talents.

If anyone disagrees then I would ask you to offer up your suggestions as to which specific WBB players are generational talents, from UConn or anywhere, without reverting to MJ, some other MBB player or someone from another sport. Then we can all have a spirited debate, kind of like the annual “all time UConn starting 5” debate that rolls around every offseason.
 
Bone Dog said:
I don’t mean to pick, since I share your doubts about the term ‘generational,’ as well as your concern about judging players prematurely. We all have hopes about Sarah, and some of them might be fulfilled. But it’s too early to anoint her. There will be plenty of time for that over the next few years.

I’m just wondering how Diana seemed during and after her freshman season. In hindsight, it’s easy to see the seeds of her eventual career. But she was merely a rotation player at first. It took an injury to get her a starting spot. And like Lou Gehrig, there was no looking back once she was in the starting lineup. Sarah had a slightly smoother path to that lineup, though injuries did have an indirect role in it. Had Ayanna and Carol not been out of competition, Sarah may have had to wait at least a little while to reveal her virtues. Those virtues are still unfolding and we don’t know exactly where they’ll lead her and UConn.

I will gladly wait with you to see what actually unfolds and share a bit of that crow pie.
Expand ...
I believe that wait would've been no more than about 48 hours. Auriemma knew exactly what he had in Strong and that she was already better than both of those kids when she got to campus and had a couple of workouts.
 
oldude said:
As I stated in my OP, the term “generational talent” is overused. I also indicated a more subtle definition of the term to indicate “an athlete doing remarkable things at a level that we’ve never quite seen before.” On that basis, I stand by my OP that DT, Maya, Stewie, Paige & Sarah all qualify as generational talents.

If anyone disagrees then I would ask you to offer up your suggestions as to which specific WBB players are generational talents, from UConn or anywhere, without reverting to MJ, some other MBB player or someone from another sport. Then we can all have a spirited debate, kind of like the annual “all time UConn starting 5” debate that rolls around every offseason.
Expand ...
One thing that encourages me in the comparison to Diana is that like Sarah she also benefitted from having a NPoY and eventual #1 draft pick playing next to her in her freshman season.

It’s all lining up!!!!! OMG!
 
BobbyJ said:
I believe that wait would've been no more than about 48 hours. Auriemma knew exactly what he had in Strong and that she was already better than both of those kids when she got to campus and had a couple of workouts.
Expand ...
Reminiscent of Paige who, prior to ger 1st game as a Husky, Geno pronounced that, “She’s even better than I thought.”
 
You'd be hard pressed to find such an accomplished freshman anywhere else in the country. Sarah is a unique talent that has the skill set of a guard, forward and center. I can't think of any other player in recent memory that has the same skill sets as Sarah.
 
.-.
oldude said:
As I stated in my OP, the term “generational talent” is overused. I also indicated a more subtle definition of the term to indicate “an athlete doing remarkable things at a level that we’ve never quite seen before.” On that basis, I stand by my OP that DT, Maya, Stewie, Paige & Sarah all qualify as generational talents.

If anyone disagrees then I would ask you to offer up your suggestions as to which specific WBB players are generational talents, from UConn or anywhere, without reverting to MJ, some other MBB player or someone from another sport. Then we can all have a spirited debate, kind of like the annual “all time UConn starting 5” debate that rolls around every offseason.
Expand ...
I agree. The term is not only overused but, imo, is pretty much meaningless. People that use it don't even have a consensus of how long a generation is. Some of them seem to think it's every couple years or so and that there's an infinite supply of them. And GOAT is even worse. They somehow believe there can be more than one greatest. Just Google 'does greatest of all time imply singular' and read what comes up. Sure, it can be broken down into categories like greatest shooter, greatest passer, greatest defender, etc. but there can be only one greatest womens or greatest mens player of all time. Of course, if they want to change their opinion every other year, then go for it. ;)
 
Cornell Lt said:
You'd be hard pressed to find such an accomplished freshman anywhere else in the country. Sarah is a unique talent that has the skill set of a guard, forward and center. I can't think of any other player in recent memory that has the same skill sets as Sarah.
Expand ...
Agree about Sarah's diverse skill set, which makes her the most difficult defensive assignment. But there were other freshmen who could have dazzled if they'd had a coach who handed them the keys to the team the way Geno did. I'm thinking of kids like Joyce Edwards or Avery Howell or Kayleigh Heckel. We can only speak in terms of potential with them since they didn't start at their teams, whereas Geno was smart enough to start Sarah and let her really shine. And there are kids like Mikayla Blakes or Olivia Olson or Syla Swords or Kennedy Smith who did start and actually did shine, though perhaps not quite as brightly as Sarah did.

This was an exceptionally talented class, and Sarah is at the top of it in my view. Her brilliance is not diminished by seeing how good her competition is.
 
BobbyJ said:
I agree. The term is not only overused but, imo, is pretty much meaningless. People that use it don't even have a consensus of how long a generation is. Some of them seem to think it's every couple years or so and that there's an infinite supply of them. And GOAT is even worse. They somehow believe there can be more than one greatest. Just Google 'does greatest of all time imply singular' and read what comes up. Sure, it can be broken down into categories like greatest shooter, greatest passer, greatest defender, etc. but there can be only one greatest womens or greatest mens player of all time. Of course, if they want to change their opinion every other year, then go for it. ;)
Expand ...
Well GOAT is definitely overused. But "generational" could depend on context. In human procreation it's maybe 20 or 25 years. In context of a college career maybe it's 4 years. That would make generational synonymous with "best in class". At least that is the way I think of "generational".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,035
Messages
4,550,422
Members
10,430
Latest member
Books&Ball


Top Bottom