Seattle vs. LA | Page 5 | The Boneyard

Seattle vs. LA

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bayareahusky said:
Nobody from USA Basketball should come out and articulate any reason why or why not someone was selected. This is just not done..... probably because it would just open Pandora's box.

Nobody cried any tears for Becky Hammon when in 2004 she was not chosen after obliterating many NCAA records at Colorado State.

It still amazes me that people deem themselves all powerful and omniscient and state beyond reservation that Parker should absolutely be given a spot on roster.

Is she one of the 12 best? I'll go along with that absolutely. Is there a mitigating factor which pushed someone else by her. Yes to that also.
Expand ...


I said I'd stay away from this subject but I can't all the time. this is a chat board. People offer opinions. How are they supposed to sound when offering an opinion? I try to say to a fault "imo" a lot. Bu it seems your aggravated because those that differ with your opinion don't sound the way you want them to sound. Well I hatt to be rude- but too bad. Get over it.

And I'm still shaking my head on your bringing up Barkley. WHo do you think you're kidding bringing up Barkley? Barkley wasn't supposed to make the team. He wasn't considered an all-time great at the time. By you bringing up Barkley seems so desperate.

As far as Becky-now you've mentioned her more than once. Who would you have put her over? I can maybe see it here. But comparing the college Barkley who by all accounts "came out of nowhere" to Parker is outrageous.
 
Fairfield Fan said:
But one has to wonder about the selections. Did Coach and the committee look backwards instead of forwards? This is a team that relies on some much older players, with half the players thirty or older. And there are only three true guards: Diana Taurasi, Sue Bird, and Lindsey Whalen. All are 33 or older. And looking at Sue Bird's early stats, is she really the player she was four years ago? What if Whalen gets hurt, or gets into foul trouble?

Speaking of playing as a team- Angel McCoughtry? Hard to see who should be taken off. But Sue? Great as she once was. Should she have been chosen, at this point in her career, over Jewell Loyd? Odyssey Sims?

Did Coach Geno go with the players he knew? Did he opt for a comfort factor? Looking back, or looking forward?

This isn't the first national team selection that was enormously controversial for leaving out a national star. Remember Jurgen Klinsmann's decision to leave Landon Donovan off the national team for the World Cup? Ultimately, that decision did not look good.

Pretty controversial....
Expand ...


in 2014 SUe Bird played well I thought. Sims look overmatched. the physicality may be more of a concern than quickness. the other player's were scoring and she was a threat king down open shots.

How I saw it- I could be wrong because I didn't see a lot- but IMO there is a misperception that you need a pg to be an assist king (or scorer) by putting up a high number of assists. this USA team doesn't need that. the forwards and centers will make plays and someone like Bird will compliment them by making shots.If you get a more erratic shooter that is more athletic but better at forcing things- this team doesn't NEED that. Bird looked so superior for example to Sims - she did what she was supposed to.

Set up the offense- don't try to do too much. the 1st pass gets the offense in the flow. you don't need a pg that's going to barrel in the lane and try to create but may force shots or if she is open not be as accurate. this team has enough offense.

As far as quick guards on the other team - we shall see.

And I'll say again- what 2gaurd out there can't be defended by MAya Moore or Tamika Catchings which Angel can guard? Michael Jordan is not playing for the other team.
 
hoophuskee said:
I said I'd stay away from this subject but I can't all the time. this is a chat board. People offer opinions. How are they supposed to sound when offering an opinion? I try to say to a fault "imo" a lot. Bu it seems your aggravated because those that differ with your opinion don't sound the way you want them to sound. Well I hatt to be rude- but too bad. Get over it.

And I'm still shaking my head on your bringing up Barkley. WHo do you think you're kidding bringing up Barkley? Barkley wasn't supposed to make the team. He wasn't considered an all-time great at the time. By you bringing up Barkley seems so desperate.

As far as Becky-now you've mentioned her more than once. Who would you have put her over? I can maybe see it here. But comparing the college Barkley who by all accounts "came out of nowhere" to Parker is outrageous.
Expand ...

Yes you are correct I get aggravated hearing the long long diatribe of why Candace is worthy and someone else is not.... you are right it is opinion....

Other than that, i respect your opinion and your dislike of my comments..... no problems here....
 
UConnCat said:
The not matching up well with Australia could be a reference to the semi-final game in London in which Parker basically was a no-show against the physical Opals. It wasn't that she shot poorly or got in foul trouble, her effort and toughness were lacking in the game that effectively decided the gold medal. She played like she wanted no part of the physical Australia players. There was a possession toward the end of the 3rd quarter when Australia was out-fighting USA for loose balls and rebounds and Parker didn't go hard after a rebound and then a loose ball. She was taken out, Asjha Jones entered the game and the combination of Charles and Jones was able to contain Cambage and Jackson and the momentum eventually turned in USA's favor.

Parker's performance in London was not that great.

Two of USA BB's last three major international competitions have been played without Candace Parker (Prague WCs in 2010 and Istanbul WCs 2014). USA BB has won gold without her so I honestly don't see the big deal.
Expand ...

the big deal is == all of us are basketball fans. so yes even though I'm a UConn Husky fan first and foremost - I love to watch greatness. this is a huge reason why I was attracted to UCONN women's basketball. I get to watch greatness so much. It's awesome. I pinch myself how lucky I've been. As a kid I always wondered about UCLA. Now I've "seen it." I would rather watch that Miss State any day vs a crappy played but close men's college game unless it is the UCONN men - then it depends what the stakes are. the UCONN women play with such beauty in form - it is such a joy to watch.

For me as fan- so does Parker. I hear that Parker played with Bird and Dt -- could you imagine in years those three playing for a team in Russia as they play more and more together? That would be awesome to watch too. As much as Parker is an old rival - she is still a joy to watch her greatness. WHile you have mentioned many times the Aussie game- I missed it or most of it- but I saw the championship game. As a fan you or no one else can erase from my mind how the brilliant Geno had her coming off the bench. And Parker at 6'4 is leading fasbreaks with Angel on one side and Whelan on the other. That was so awesome. You get a player with speed and pt guard skills feeding a prime Angel on the break - that is amazing. And I think a bit of Maya was mixed in there too. Parker is no doubt among the tops in the world and when she is leading a break- getting out on the open floor- it is magnificent watch. I feel cheated as a fan that I won't be able to watch that. It's not your big deal but as a fan it's mine. On this board at least I can vent. We'd still beat Australia if we had her for example and didn't have Angel.

wish the subject would die -- but it keeps getting brought up. ANd if there is any close game at the Olympics - you know the announcers will bring it up. It will ruin what I'm watching a bit. I just believe the reasons given are extreme. They don't have to tell me. But it doesn't mean this fan has to like it and can't vent from time to time.
 
And I'm still shaking my head on your bringing up Barkley. WHo do you think you're kidding bringing up Barkley? Barkley wasn't supposed to make the team. He wasn't considered an all-time great at the time. By you bringing up Barkley seems so desperate.

As far as Becky-now you've mentioned her more than once. Who would you have put her over? I can maybe see it here. But comparing the college Barkley who by all accounts "came out of nowhere" to Parker is outrageous.[/QUOTE]

I will say one last thing before I sign off and leave the commenting to others...... I remember well 1984 and the controversy..... watched a lot of SEC that year.... was my first year of grad school.... according to you Barkley "came out of nowhere"..... but he was #5 overall draft choice in NBA that year... before the Olympic team was chosen..... Jeff Turner (who's he?) was 12 picks later...... out of Vanderbilt... same conference... ..... he made the Olympic team..... Again I appreciate your labeling my citing the Barkley thing "desperate" and "outrageous"..... yes it is your opinion, and you may be right.... as u say it is a chat forum, and I thought it was a valid point.....
 
Bayareahusky said:
And I'm still shaking my head on your bringing up Barkley. WHo do you think you're kidding bringing up Barkley? Barkley wasn't supposed to make the team. He wasn't considered an all-time great at the time. By you bringing up Barkley seems so desperate.

As far as Becky-now you've mentioned her more than once. Who would you have put her over? I can maybe see it here. But comparing the college Barkley who by all accounts "came out of nowhere" to Parker is outrageous.

I will say one last thing before I sign off and leave the commenting to others. I remember well 1984 and the controversy..... watched a lot of SEC that year.... was my first year of grad school.... according to you Barkley "came out of nowhere"..... but he was #5 overall draft choice in NBA that year... before the Olympic team was chosen..... Jeff Turner (who's he?) was 12 picks later. out of Vanderbilt... same conference... ..... he made the Olympic team..... Again I appreciate your labeling my citing the Barkley thing "desperate" and "outrageous"..... yes it is your opinion, and you may be right.... as u say it is a chat forum, and I thought it was a valid point
Expand ...

Bayarea, upon further review you have a point on Barkley's non-selection in 1984.
" During the trials, Auburn junior Charles Barkley impressed with his performance - most observers felt he and North Carolina guard Michael Jordan were the two top performers. However, Barkley's and Knight's strong personalities did not mesh and Barkley was one of the last cuts for the roster"
1984 United States men's Olympic basketball team - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This also reinforces the point that Barley should have been on the 1984 team if basketball ability was the deciding factor. Instead "personalities" got in the way. Candace should have been on 2016 Olympic team, something not- basketball ability related got in the way.
 
.-.
hoophuskee said:
the big deal is == all of us are basketball fans. so yes even though I'm a UConn Husky fan first and foremost - I love to watch greatness. this is a huge reason why I was attracted to UCONN women's basketball. I get to watch greatness so much. It's awesome. I pinch myself how lucky I've been. As a kid I always wondered about UCLA. Now I've "seen it." I would rather watch that Miss State any day vs a crappy played but close men's college game unless it is the UCONN men - then it depends what the stakes are. the UCONN women play with such beauty in form - it is such a joy to watch.

For me as fan- so does Parker. I hear that Parker played with Bird and Dt -- could you imagine in years those three playing for a team in Russia as they play more and more together? That would be awesome to watch too. As much as Parker is an old rival - she is still a joy to watch her greatness. WHile you have mentioned many times the Aussie game- I missed it or most of it- but I saw the championship game. As a fan you or no one else can erase from my mind how the brilliant Geno had her coming off the bench. And Parker at 6'4 is leading fasbreaks with Angel on one side and Whelan on the other. That was so awesome. You get a player with speed and pt guard skills feeding a prime Angel on the break - that is amazing. And I think a bit of Maya was mixed in there too. Parker is no doubt among the tops in the world and when she is leading a break- getting out on the open floor- it is magnificent watch. I feel cheated as a fan that I won't be able to watch that. It's not your big deal but as a fan it's mine. On this board at least I can vent. We'd still beat Australia if we had her for example and didn't have Angel.

wish the subject would die -- but it keeps getting brought up. ANd if there is any close game at the Olympics - you know the announcers will bring it up. It will ruin what I'm watching a bit. I just believe the reasons given are extreme. They don't have to tell me. But it doesn't mean this fan has to like it and can't vent from time to time.
Expand ...


This is one of the best posts that I've read. When I think about "why I'm upset" about Parker not being on the team, I have to look at it from my fan perspective. As a fan, I want to see the best players, because they are a beauty to watch. EDD is a player that I would watch even when she was in college. I certainly wasn't a Delaware fan, but the beauty in how she plays the game was a joy to watch. I am the same way about Candace. These 6'5" players that can handle the ball like a guard and do so many amazing things on the court is simply fun to see.

Also, as a fan of the women's game, I really want the sport to grow. I would love to see the WNBA become the primary source of income for all of them. I would like to see these great players be able to stay state side, have a family, and play the game they love without having to go overseas to simply make a living. In order for that day to come, the game must grow. Every 4 years, their talent is showcased on the National stage. For the sake of the game and for the sake of growth, the best players need to be put front and center. They need to be show cased. There are fans that will not watch a WNBA game, but they will tune into the Olympics. This is an opportunity to grab more fans for the game. An example of this is women's soccer. Prior to that day when the young lady stripped off her top when they won the gold, I had never watched a women's soccer game. Heck, I didn't even watch soccer. Now, I tune in to watch them when I get a chance.

I'm not only upset about Candace not playing and I know this won't be popular here, but I don't want to see Sue on the national stage either. I used to love her game. It wasn't because she knew what to do with the ball. I loved the way she played because she did some dynamic things on the court. She was fun to watch and made jaw dropping plays. She's not that player any more. She has inspired countless little girls because of how she played the game. I remember how I used to love Ticha. This is why I would prefer to see someone younger on the team this go around. Little girls love flair that Diggins and Sims play with. I want to see that type of talent and flare on the national stage. As a fan, let's think beyond ourselves and think about the little girls out there watching the game because it's the Olympics. Use the National stage to keep the game growing.
 
CocoHusky said:
Bayarea, upon further review you have a point on Barkley's non-selection in 1984.
" During the trials, Auburn junior Charles Barkley impressed with his performance - most observers felt he and North Carolina guard Michael Jordan were the two top performers. However, Barkley's and Knight's strong personalities did not mesh and Barkley was one of the last cuts for the roster"
1984 United States men's Olympic basketball team - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This also reinforces the point that Barley should have been on the 1984 team if basketball ability was the deciding factor. Instead "personalities" got in the way. Candace should have been on 2016 Olympic team, something not- basketball ability related got in the way.
Expand ...

And Agler said it best. He stated when making basketball decisions, keep it about basketball. That was the best response I've heard to this entire ordeal.
 
UConnCat said:
The not matching up well with Australia could be a reference to the semi-final game in London in which Parker basically was a no-show against the physical Opals. It wasn't that she shot poorly or got in foul trouble, her effort and toughness were lacking in the game that effectively decided the gold medal. She played like she wanted no part of the physical Australia players. There was a possession toward the end of the 3rd quarter when Australia was out-fighting USA for loose balls and rebounds and Parker didn't go hard after a rebound and then a loose ball. She was taken out, Asjha Jones entered the game and the combination of Charles and Jones was able to contain Cambage and Jackson and the momentum eventually turned in USA's favor.

Parker's performance in London was not that great.

Two of USA BB's last three major international competitions have been played without Candace Parker (Prague WCs in 2010 and Istanbul WCs 2014). USA BB has won gold without her so I honestly don't see the big deal.
Expand ...


This isn't the way I remembered it, but regardless, there wasn't a player on the roster that didn't have a bad game, so one bad game certainly isn't the reason. Also, if you take the stats from their Olympic run and extrapolate the numbers to the same number of minutes players, you will see that Parker was the most impactful player on the team thru their run. What was mind boggling was her lack of minutes considering the numbers being put up when she was on the court.
 
Jmpenn said:
I just watched the first half. In the first quarter I didn't see either score over Candace. When Candace came in Cambage went out and they only wound up playing against each other for a little bit. Cambage and Jackson both scored over Charles and Fowles a lot. In the second quarter Jackson scored over Candace once and Cambage scored over Candace 3 times and was fouled once. Candace also causes Cambage to miss a few times and to turn it over once.
Catch also did not go because of back problems.
Expand ...

That's what I saw.
 
UConnCat said:
Not sure if this question is directed at my post, but I never said anything about being "eliminated from consideration" or "deemed not eligible." I raised what may have been a factor in not choosing a particular player who was part of the player pool.
Expand ...

But you can't use that as a factor and not apply those same factors to others. That's the point.

And to answer your question about Candace reaching out to Pat, your account of what happened is inaccurate, but Pat was the first person she called after the Gold Medal game.
 
Justavisitor said:
But you can't use that as a factor and not apply those same factors to others. That's the point.

And to answer your question about Candace reaching out to Pat, your account of what happened is inaccurate, but Pat was the first person she called after the Gold Medal game.
Expand ...

You've missed the point.

I believe my account is indeed accurate. From the espn story: MacMullan: Parker propels U.S. women to gold

"After her disappointing game in the semifinals against Australia, Parker tried to call Summitt, but was unable to reach her. "
 
.-.
Justavisitor said:
And Agler said it best. He stated when making basketball decisions, keep it about basketball. That was the best response I've heard to this entire ordeal.
Expand ...

Actually, it's more than basketball, it's about team. Agler made the decision all about Geno. He said it was Geno's decision and it was personal. I say Agler is picking an easy target, making Parker a victim of Geno Auriemma's personal biases and giving USA BB a complete pass on the decision. That's irresponsible.
 
UConnCat said:
Actually, it's more than basketball, it's about team. Agler made the decision all about Geno. He said it was Geno's decision and it was personal. I say Agler is picking an easy target, making Parker a victim of Geno Auriemma's personal biases and giving USA BB a complete pass on the decision. That's irresponsible.
Expand ...

I certainly wouldn't dismiss anything Agler says. I would be willing to bet that he knows the exact reasons why. There was a meeting with Candace to inform her she was not on the final roster. The fact they felt a meeting was needed means there was something more that needed to be said and it wasn't as simple as getting cut. Others are not afforded a meeting with the committee chair. I also would imagine those closest to Candace know why and this would include the organization that she represents. What's irresponsible is to keep tossing out negative speculation toward Candace's character without facts. I believe Agler has some factual information.
 
UConnCat said:
You've missed the point.

I believe my account is indeed accurate. From the espn story: MacMullan: Parker propels U.S. women to gold

"After her disappointing game in the semifinals against Australia, Parker tried to call Summitt, but was unable to reach her. "
Expand ...

And it doesn't state why she tried to call her. Maybe she needed to hear some words of wisdom on how to deal with what many speculated was unfair treatment. Maybe she was looking for strength in how to raise her head and push forward, regardless of the circumstances. She certainly didn't need Pat to tell her how to play. It goes deeper than that.
 
Justavisitor said:
I certainly wouldn't dismiss anything Agler says. I would be willing to bet that he knows the exact reasons why. There was a meeting with Candace to inform her she was not on the final roster. The fact they felt a meeting was needed means there was something more that needed to be said and it wasn't as simple as getting cut. Others are not afforded a meeting with the committee chair. I also would imagine those closest to Candace know why and this would include the organization that she represents. What's irresponsible is to keep tossing out negative speculation toward Candace's character without facts. I believe Agler has some factual information.
Expand ...

Maybe Agler has some factual information, and maybe he doesn't. Or maybe he's being selective about what facts he chooses to talk about. But I doubt he or Parker were told by Carol Callan that but for Geno you'd be on the team. Agler chose to make a USA BB decision personal to Geno. I'm not sure what you mean by "a meeting" with Parker, but I don't doubt that Carol Callan handled the Selection Committee's decision on Parker differently than how she handled the Committee's decisions on other candidates. Nothing surprising there.
 
UConnCat said:
Maybe Agler has some factual information, and maybe he doesn't. Or maybe he's being selective about what facts he chooses to talk about. But I doubt he or Parker were told by Carol Callan that but for Geno you'd be on the team. Agler chose to make a USA BB decision personal to Geno. I'm not sure what you mean by "a meeting" with Parker, but I don't doubt that Carol Callan handled the Selection Committee's decision on Parker differently than how she handled the Committee's decisions on other candidates. Nothing surprising there.
Expand ...

So it's known that Barkley was cut because he and Knight had strong personality conflicts. Is it that hard to imagine that CP and GA also have a strong personality conflict that could have led to her not being on the team? It's similar to the strong personality conflict between Jordan and Isaih. It happens, but it shouldn't.
 
Justavisitor said:
Is it that hard to imagine that CP and GA also have a strong personality conflict that could have led to her not being on the team?
Expand ...
For me yes this is very hard to imagine that either CP or GA would let a personality conflict get in the way of what is best for the Olympic team.
 
.-.
Justavisitor said:
So it's known that Barkley was cut because he and Knight had strong personality conflicts. Is it that hard to imagine that CP and GA also have a strong personality conflict that could have led to her not being on the team? It's similar to the strong personality conflict between Jordan and Isaih. It happens, but it shouldn't.
Expand ...

If this is what you choose to believe, then by all means run with it. As I've said previously, USA BB does not make irrational decisions. It has a committee that discusses player selections and votes on them. There is input from the Coach, as there should be. USA BB is bigger than any one player or any one coach.

I (finally) declare myself done with this issue.
 
MDoggie said:
Maybe what was best actually happened.
Expand ...

What's interesting is that the attention on Candace has grown, her twitter followers went up, more articles are being written, and she's been trending on twitter both after the announcement and after her first game. This could end up being a blessing in disguise that puts more money in her pockets. Funny how things work out.
 
I hope it causes more people to watch the women's game. I am very disappointed she isn't on the team. However, the continuing protest and publicity might garner new fans. I hope so. And I especially hope it cleans USA basketballs house of people with an agenda and that they are replaced with fair and unbiased committee members with the courage to speak up for what is fair for US athletes.
 
Note the quote from Geno in the MacMullan article. We all know how direct he is and how tough he has been on almost all of his players, including Stewie.

"Candace has a lot of skills," Auriemma said, "and some nights she really tries to use them. Other nights, she forgets the skills she has.

"Luckily for us, tonight she remembered to use them."

Geno was addressing inconsistency of effort and/or focus. As a casual observer, I've seen the same in her game. I thought she was the best player in the WNBA when she played last season, and yet she disappeared at times, costing her team some wins.
 
Magy Cannon said:
I hope it causes more people to watch the women's game. I am very disappointed she isn't on the team. However, the continuing protest and publicity might garner new fans. I hope so. And I especially hope it cleans USA basketballs house of people with an agenda and that they are replaced with fair and unbiased committee members with the courage to speak up for what is fair for US athletes.
Expand ...
And where do you get that info from? Where is the proof that the committee is unfair and biased against anyone? Who on USABB has an agenda and what exactly is that agenda? Please link the quotes, tweets, or articles addressing that!
 
.-.
MilfordHusky said:
Note the quote from Geno in the MacMullan article. We all know how direct he is and how tough he has been on almost all of his players, including Stewie.

"Candace has a lot of skills," Auriemma said, "and some nights she really tries to use them. Other nights, she forgets the skills she has.

"Luckily for us, tonight she remembered to use them."

Geno was addressing inconsistency of effort and/or focus. As a casual observer, I've seen the same in her game. I thought she was the best player in the WNBA when she played last season, and yet she disappeared at times, costing her team some wins.
Expand ...
If inconsistency of effort and/or focus is the standard, has Geno had a Player in the past 30 years that has achieved this standard?
 
I agree totally with UConnCat et al. that the folks at USA Basketball are not dumb. They chose the 12 players that they thought would give them the team with the best chances of beating the others out there, knowing that the Aussies gave us a tough game in 2012 and Spain gave us a tough game in 2014.

Is Candace one of the 12 most talented players in the world? Clearly, the answer is in the affirmative. But the committee thought that the team composition was slightly better as chosen than by adding her and removing one of the twelve. I accept that.

If they really did tell her that they preferred EDD and had concerns about her playing Australia, look at EDD's marvelous shooting stats--with 3-point shooting being very important in the international game--and look at the 2012 game against the Aussies. Candace is a marvelous finesse player, but Cambage, Jackson, and Batkovic pushed her around.
 
CocoHusky said:
If inconsistency of effort and/or focus is the standard, has Geno had a Player in the past 30 years that has achieved this standard?
Expand ...
Morgan Tuck. Maya Moore. Kelly Faris. At least.
 
MilfordHusky said:
I agree totally with UConnCat et al. that the folks at USA Basketball are not dumb. They chose the 12 players that they thought would give them the team with the best chances of beating the others out there, knowing that the Aussies gave us a tough game in 2012 and Spain gave us a tough game in 2014.

Is Candace one of the 12 most talented players in the world? Clearly, the answer is in the affirmative. But the committee thought that the team composition was slightly better as chosen than by adding her and removing one of the twelve. I accept that.

If they really did tell her that they preferred EDD and had concerns about her playing Australia, look at EDD's marvelous shooting stats--with 3-point shooting being very important in the international game--and look at the 2012 game against the Aussies. Candace is a marvelous finesse player, but
MilfordHusky said:
I agree totally with UConnCat et al. that the folks at USA Basketball are not dumb. They chose the 12 players that they thought would give them the team with the best chances of beating the others out there, knowing that the Aussies gave us a tough game in 2012 and Spain gave us a tough game in 2014.

Is Candace one of the 12 most talented players in the world? Clearly, the answer is in the affirmative. But the committee thought that the team composition was slightly better as chosen than by adding her and removing one of the twelve. I accept that.

If they really did tell her that they preferred EDD and had concerns about her playing Australia, look at EDD's marvelous shooting stats--with 3-point shooting being very important in the international game--and look at the 2012 game against the Aussies. Candace is a marvelous finesse player, but Cambage, Jackson, and Batkovic pushed her around.
Expand ...
pushed her around.
Expand ...
Cambage, Jackson, and Batkovic pushed everyone around in 2012. Catch and Sylvia took the brunt of the pushing yet they are both on the 2016 roster.
 
MilfordHusky said:
Morgan Tuck. Maya Moore. Kelly Faris. At least.
Expand ...
Which Morgan Tuck? The one who excelled at missing "wide open layups" or the one "if you gone to a practice you would think she was our best player and at other times not so much".
Which Maya Moore? The one "who stand around pretending to set a screen until the ball gets to her and then she shoots it".

Kelly Faris was an excellent response.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,384
Messages
4,569,663
Members
10,475
Latest member
Tunwin22


Top Bottom