I do see your point as to the overestimation perhaps done for the entire UConn team, however not in the case of CW: I'd say when you are the HS Gatorade POY as were Maya Moore, Tina Charles, Candace Parker, Katie Lou Samuelson, Kaleena Moequeda-Lewis, Breanna Stewart, Brianna Turner and most recently Azzi Fudd--I think what is expected of CW's contribution to the team is quite reasonable expectation and not unrealistic....
That would depend on the assumption that the Gatorade player of the Year would become a player who was in the category of Stewart, Moore, Tina Charles, and Parker. They were basically high impact players who could be and were the main cog who could carry their teams. There is a difference between a really good support player a go-to top dog ( or Husky). The closest player to CW, in that respect, was KML. She was actually more of a support player than CW. Put her on the present team and she would have a far less positive impact. KLM was probably the most overrated player in that respect. Skill wise, at the college level and even more, as a professional, she was/is very one dimensional. She does on thing well- shoot three's.
KML had the advantage of playing on a team that could make good use of her skill while also mitigating her weaknesses. Put KML on the present team and no way does she make AA. Her skill can easily be negated by someone playing her close, which would happen if she did not have multiple teammates who were also offensive threats.
I remember when there was a discussion on this board about the relative merits of KML and KLS before KLS saw the court. Having watched both in high school, I thought there was no comparison between the two. KLS had a far greater skill set and had the advantage in both height and mobility. I always thought KML was vastly overrated coming out of high school and did not think her skills would translate. She was just fortunate to land with Uconn that only needed her shooting from the wing.
The reason I bring up KLS is that she is the perfect example of a support player who can succeed on the right team. CW is not as one dimensional as KML. She has many skills, but those skills combined do take her to the level of a Moore, Charles or Parker with respect to the impact she would have on her team. We can not always assume a player's impact on their team will match their rating at the previous level. My evaluation of KLS was based on my observations of her play in high school and how I felt her skills would translate to the next level and not her rating. I also watched CW play in the under 18 worlds 3x3 which is what led me to believe she was not a really high impact player at the college level.
Even her class rankings were somewhat deceptive. It was, by many, considered a weak class. That along with the fact that no one player ever held the top rating consistently throughout the ranking process the last few years. CW basically ended up number one by default. Her showing at the McDonalds game gave a false sense of what she would consistently do. The point of this lesson is that we need to not put too much value on high school basketball ratings. They are not always right. And bottom line - the expectations of CW based on her being the Number one recruit were not valid. Using her rating as justification for inflated expectations does not justify those expectations but only rationalizes them. It is always prudent to wait before making assumptions about things that have not transpired. I remember posters not using the word " if" but rather the word " when" in describing what both CW and Uconn would accomplish. The spoke of possibilities like they were a certainty.
Nothing wrong with making mistakes and having our preceptions turn out wrong. The thing is to learn from our mistakes. When we rationalize them in saying they were justified that leans into the direction of not learning. The real mistake was that we placed too much credence in ratings not that our perspective turned out wrong. The latter was only the result of the former.
