Stewie's place in UCWBB History

[Wally East]

Great grouping but pretty tough to leave Cheryl Miller off of any Top 5 list.

And I'd definitely replace Catchings with Holdsclaw. Catchings has had a much, much better pro career but in college, Holdsclaw, ugh, scary good.

 

[baggerbob]

It really doesn't matter, who of the 3 is the greatest. But one of the defining moments for me with Stewie was, the game against Rutgers. The Rutgers player stole the ball from Mo at halfcourt, and appeared to have a breakaway layup, and from the baseline Stewie chased her down, and swatted the ball away. Stewie may dunk, but that play even with a big lead, shows the heart of a champion, never give up.

 

[Biff]

It really doesn't matter, who of the 3 is the greatest. But one of the defining moments for me with Stewie was, the game against Rutgers. The Rutgers player stole the ball from Mo at halfcourt, and appeared to have a breakaway layup, and from the baseline Stewie chased her down, and swatted the ball away. Stewie may dunk, but that play even with a big lead, shows the heart of a champion, never give up.

 

[UcMiami]

It really doesn't matter, who of the 3 is the greatest. But one of the defining moments for me with Stewie was, the game against Rutgers. The Rutgers player stole the ball from Mo at halfcourt, and appeared to have a breakaway layup, and from the baseline Stewie chased her down, and swatted the ball away. Stewie may dunk, but that play even with a big lead, shows the heart of a champion, never give up.

And i would match that with Maya's steal against DePaul and immediate time out to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat - also racing full court to accomplish it.
And i would match both or those with Diana's play at the end of the TX NCAA game - not a single moment of stunning brilliance, but one after another clutch basket (plus a missed free throw or two! ) followed by the final steal to prevent a shot as the buzzer sounded.

They and many others have provided us with so many wow moments to spice up unprecedented success for the program as a whole.

 

[Bonpland]

Great grouping but pretty tough to leave Cheryl Miller off of any Top 5 list.

After I clicked send on my post earlier today I said to myself, "Damn how could you fashion a list of all-time greats and not include Miller?" Because it was so long ago we forget that she may have been the best to ever play this game.

And in an somewhat related footnote, had EDD (I know, stop bringing all this up again) had survived in Storrs we'd be making room for a fourth Husky on that exclusive list of all-time greats.

 

[bags27]

oh, EDD. why did you have to remind us? sigh......

 

[UcMiami]

After I clicked send on my post earlier today I said to myself, "Damn how could you fashion a list of all-time greats and not include Miller?" Because it was so long ago we forget that she may have been the best to ever play this game.

I think your last sentence above is so true - the lack of any exposure and of any national consciousness of WCBB before really 1995 and except for TN and CT, really before the 2000s makes it very tough to relate to the earlier stars - no television, no US professional options and very few international options at that time beyond national team play. Add in that to remember watching college stars of the early 90s and before you have to be getting on in years as well being from a tiny fan base. While we may complain of lack of fan support for women's basketball, it really has exploded in the last 15 years even if it is still dwarfed by those of the men's sports.

 

[RSHERMVIKES]

Great grouping but pretty tough to leave Cheryl Miller off of any Top 5 list.

divots- - -When I was writing the above I couldn't think of Cheryl Miller's name and put Swoopes instead. Thanks for reminding me, switch Miller in for Swoopes!

 

[boontonbomber]

Well, we have gone five rounds in another thread on personal stats vs. team stats and fought to a draw, so I will just mention that with everything that Stewart has already accomplished and the good things to come this year, she will still finish behind Maya in the following statistics:
1. Points - wide margin
2. Assists - wide margin
3. Assits/TO
4. Rebounds
5. Steals - wide margin

Stewart will win only one statistical category: Blocks - wide margin

Shooting - Moore currently leads comfortably in both overall and 3 point percentages, but Stewart is having an anomalous year so if that continues they will be pretty close.

They will have both played about the same number of games so per game stats will be similar to the above, but Maya will end up having played more minutes per game so per minute stats will lessen the statistical advantages though I suspect will not swing them all the way to the other side. But minutes per game is also a reflection of Stewarts struggles as a freshman, and Maya's shorter and weaker bench and perhaps stronger overall SOS.

Awards - they both have been NPOY three years, but Maya is the first and only four time AA in Uconn history. Stewart is the first 3 time MVP of the FF and may get a fourth, but you have to win the NC for serious consideration so that is almost double counting the same accomplishment - Stewart has been on the all tournament team three years, Maya three years and DT two years. Interestingly Maya made the all tournament team as a senior when she didn't even make it to the finals (and DT was left off in 2002 when her team did win it.) Maya also was an academic all america three years (Stewart has one) and academic all american NPOY 2 years something Stewart hasn't won yet (only Lobo 1 and Jen 1 have won that award before.)

So ... personal stats belong to Maya, but ....
To me championships do matter and while the difference between 2 and 3 and 4 isn't as important, I would tend to rank the big three in descending order of championships which is likely the reverse of the statistical rankings.

Stats aside, you have to subjectively consider Breanna's impact at the other end of the floor. Her blocks and steals don't begin to tell the story as to how much she means to UConn defensively. Maya was a flashy but careless defender, and Taurasi, well... When you consider how important defense has been to UConn's success, I give the nod to Breanna.

 

[UcMiami]

Stats aside, you have to subjectively consider Breanna's impact at the other end of the floor. Her blocks and steals don't begin to tell the story as to how much she means to UConn defensively. Maya was a flashy but careless defender, and Taurasi, well... When you consider how important defense has been to UConn's success, I give the nod to Breanna.

I disagree with that characterization of Maya's defense (she was never careless in anything she has done in life I think! ), and I think DT's defensive liability has always been more of a myth generated by Geno than reality. None of these players were quite Kelly Faris in terms of defensive intensity, but they all played good defense. I will give Breanna a slight edge because of her height, but Maya playing both up in size against taller players and down in size against faster players performed very well.

 

[j66kicker]

Now, if you want to talk about best duo? Yes, Stewie and Mo. I would take them first over any other set of same-class or adjoining-class teammates (what I mean is teammates that played together for 3 or 4 years) (Maya and Tina would probably be the next pick). They're probably the 3rd and 4th best players in school history and they're in the same class. Remarkable It's no wonder that Stewie already has three rings

 

[lne001]

To take a quote from 79 about Bird and Magic. Bird can score but Magic can do more.

Please allow me to disagree. Points and shooting - Bird. Assists - Johnson (but Bird was probably the best passing forward ever). Rebounding and Defense - Bird.

http://www.landofbasketball.com/player_comparison/b/larry_bird_vs_magic_johnson.htm

 

[Waquoit]

If UConn wins this year, Stewart will be the unquestioned GOAT. I think she's the best even if they don't.

 

[Gus Mahler]

And i would match both or those with Diana's play at the end of the TX NCAA game - not a single moment of stunning brilliance, but one after another clutch basket (plus a missed free throw or two! ) followed by the final steal to prevent a shot as the buzzer sounded.

Plus there was that take-your-breath-away pass to Crockett.

 

[Wally East]

View attachment 11851

Sue and D don't find the criteria I laid out (teammates for at least three years) (And, I think I still might take Mo and Stewie over Sue and D.)

 

[diggerfoot]

Every once in awhile this comes up, with comparisons to supporting casts. Taurasi, Moore and Stewart all had talented supporting casts, to emphatically insist that one supporting cast was better or worst than another only reveals the bias of the advocate. They were all talented; it's beyond the capabilities of any Boneyarder to demonstrate which was most or least talented aside from "because I say so."

However, there are a couple things we can decisively determine. Taurasi won a championship with decisively the least experienced talent. Maybe the talent of Strother, et al was greater or lesser than others ... once again, that cannot be objectively determined ... but they were undeniably the least experienced squad to win a UConn championship and they did so mainly because Taurasi led that team to overcome their inexperience. Whether Moore's teammates her senior year were a more talented bunch or not, which cannot be concluded outside of a biased "I say so," is beside the point. They were her team to lead and, if anything, a little more experienced than Taurasi's crew her junior year, and they could not get it done.

Moore scored a bunch (35 points?) in the last game she lost ... and I felt that was the problem. She did not know how to involve her team and make them better to the extent that Taurasi could. I'm not saying that Moore is bad at that, just that she could not do so like Taurasi. With Stewart we will never know. She always played with more experienced talent. I don't think she could do what Taurasi did with an inexperienced crew, but we will never know. However, Stewart did duplicate Taurasi's ability to lead an underdog to the championship ... and as a mere freshman. Moore only won championships while playing for teams that were heavy favorites. Granted, she was a big reason why they were heavy favorites, yet the same can be said for Taurasi and Stewart on their impressive teams. Only Taurasi and Stewart led teams that were not heavy favorites. In Stewart's case she was the key player in beating a team that already beat us three times that year.

For me, how one can lead a team to victory is the most important criterion for greatness. The greater the obstacles faced the greater the achievement. Taurasi overcame the greatest obstacles (though, in fairness, Stewart did not have the chance to overcome the inexperienced teammates obstacle), Stewart overcame the second greatest obstacle. For that reason I'd have to rank them Taurasi, Stewart and Moore.

 

[hoophuskee]

Every once in awhile this comes up, with comparisons to supporting casts. Taurasi, Moore and Stewart all had talented supporting casts, to emphatically insist that one supporting cast was better or worst than another only reveals the bias of the advocate. They were all talented; it's beyond the capabilities of any Boneyarder to demonstrate which was most or least talented aside from "because I say so."

However, there are a couple things we can decisively determine. Taurasi won a championship with decisively the least experienced talent. Maybe the talent of Strother, et al was greater or lesser than others ... once again, that cannot be objectively determined ... but they were undeniably the least experienced squad to win a UConn championship and they did so mainly because Taurasi led that team to overcome their inexperience. Whether Moore's teammates her senior year were a more talented bunch or not, which cannot be concluded outside of a biased "I say so," is beside the point. They were her team to lead and, if anything, a little more experienced than Taurasi's crew her junior year, and they could not get it done.

Moore scored a bunch (35 points?) in the last game she lost ... and I felt that was the problem. She did not know how to involve her team and make them better to the extent that Taurasi could. I'm not saying that Moore is bad at that, just that she could not do so like Taurasi. With Stewart we will never know. She always played with more experienced talent. I don't think she could do what Taurasi did with an inexperienced crew, but we will never know. However, Stewart did duplicate Taurasi's ability to lead an underdog to the championship ... and as a mere freshman. Moore only won championships while playing for teams that were heavy favorites. Granted, she was a big reason why they were heavy favorites, yet the same can be said for Taurasi and Stewart on their impressive teams. Only Taurasi and Stewart led teams that were not heavy favorites. In Stewart's case she was the key player in beating a team that already beat us three times that year.

For me, how one can lead a team to victory is the most important criterion for greatness. The greater the obstacles faced the greater the achievement. Taurasi overcame the greatest obstacles (though, in fairness, Stewart did not have the chance to overcome the inexperienced teammates obstacle), Stewart overcame the second greatest obstacle. For that reason I'd have to rank them Taurasi, Stewart and Moore.

I agree- but I would like to add-- that year Maya lost- Geno had said two times he started the game off telling his team to get Maya going from the start. The other game was Stanford. Both games they lost. Geno changed the offense to start the game- though it is possible he did other times and didn't want his team taking blame. And I often wonder when you play a terrific team 4 times in one season like Maya had to do- how much that matters.

Look how fearful many get at the thought of having to play USF 4 times. Heck even Debbie Antonelli is out of her mind calling on USF to beat UCONN this year. And now with Stewie going head-to-head vs ND if she was a sophomore- could we have expected to beat them 4 times / a sweep in the past two years from her soph year till now? In a way Stewie and DT never had to go through the gauntlet of beating a strong well-coached offensive juggernaut team 4 times in a year like Maya had to.

Over the past 3 years there is no way UCONN would have gone "unscathed" vs ND if they we to have played 12 times. This play that game could very well have been in the NCAA tourney even though UCONN was superior and maybe would have beaten them three other times. Stewie would take a "hit" for that? I guess so. It becomes sooo subjective.

 

[UcMiami]

Every once in awhile this comes up, with comparisons to supporting casts. Taurasi, Moore and Stewart all had talented supporting casts, to emphatically insist that one supporting cast was better or worst than another only reveals the bias of the advocate. They were all talented; it's beyond the capabilities of any Boneyarder to demonstrate which was most or least talented aside from "because I say so."

However, there are a couple things we can decisively determine. Taurasi won a championship with decisively the least experienced talent. Maybe the talent of Strother, et al was greater or lesser than others ... once again, that cannot be objectively determined ... but they were undeniably the least experienced squad to win a UConn championship and they did so mainly because Taurasi led that team to overcome their inexperience. Whether Moore's teammates her senior year were a more talented bunch or not, which cannot be concluded outside of a biased "I say so," is beside the point. They were her team to lead and, if anything, a little more experienced than Taurasi's crew her junior year, and they could not get it done.

Moore scored a bunch (35 points?) in the last game she lost ... and I felt that was the problem. She did not know how to involve her team and make them better to the extent that Taurasi could. I'm not saying that Moore is bad at that, just that she could not do so like Taurasi. With Stewart we will never know. She always played with more experienced talent. I don't think she could do what Taurasi did with an inexperienced crew, but we will never know. However, Stewart did duplicate Taurasi's ability to lead an underdog to the championship ... and as a mere freshman. Moore only won championships while playing for teams that were heavy favorites. Granted, she was a big reason why they were heavy favorites, yet the same can be said for Taurasi and Stewart on their impressive teams. Only Taurasi and Stewart led teams that were not heavy favorites. In Stewart's case she was the key player in beating a team that already beat us three times that year.

For me, how one can lead a team to victory is the most important criterion for greatness. The greater the obstacles faced the greater the achievement. Taurasi overcame the greatest obstacles (though, in fairness, Stewart did not have the chance to overcome the inexperienced teammates obstacle), Stewart overcame the second greatest obstacle. For that reason I'd have to rank them Taurasi, Stewart and Moore.

Nice post, but just a note of caution - we all have this impression that 2003 was Taurasi and a bunch of callow freshman - but the starters on that team were:
Taurasi - junior 37 games
Moore - red shirt sophomore 38 games
Conlon - junior 29 games
M Valley - junior 18 games
Battle - red shirt sophomore 13 games
Strother - freshman 38 games
Wolfe - freshman 10 games
Turner - freshman 7 games

So there were 55 games started by freshman - Ann averaged 31.5 minutes a game, Turner 20.8, and Crockett 15.9 and Nicole was injured in the 10th game and didn't return that season (25.8 minutes in those ten)

On Maya's senior team:
Maya - senior 38 games
Hayes - junior 38 games
Faris - sophomore 38 games
Hartley - freshman 36 games
Dolson - freshman 34 games
Dixon - senior 4 games
Buck - red shirt sophomore 1 game
Walker - freshman 1 game

So there were 71 games started by freshman - Hartley averaged 31.8 minutes a game, Dolson 24.2, and other freshman 11.7 with Walker leaving after 17 games (18.8 in those games)

You can argue relative talent but minutes played by freshman for both of those teams were basically identical, the number of freshman starts tilts heavily to Maya's team, and in terms of ranking and reputation coming out of HS Strother and Turner were more highly regarded than Hartley and Dolson, and the two that did not finish the year also tilted toward Wolfe I think but they sort of cancel each other out. Willnett was a more effective contributor than Engeln and Johnson the other two freshman Maya's senior year as her minutes suggest.

The rest of the team experience is pretty well balanced - the sophomores on Taurus's team were both in their third year in the system so growth-wise close to juniors.

It is often argued that centers and PGs take longer to develop in college than other positions and I think while Stef was great, relying on a freshman center and a freshman PG in the NCAAs is harder than relying on a freshman guard and forwards and Stef really was all they had as a center by the NCAAs.

What Taurasi and that 2003 team was able to accomplish was magical, what Moore and that 2011 team was unable to accomplish was 'shattering' - they both had daunting tasks to lead teams relying for important contributions from freshman.

 

[diggerfoot]

You can argue relative talent but minutes played by freshman for both of those teams were basically identical, the number of freshman starts tilts heavily to Maya's team, and in terms of ranking and reputation coming out of HS Strother and Turner were more highly regarded than Hartley and Dolson, and the two that did not finish the year also tilted toward Wolfe I think but they sort of cancel each other out. Willnett was a more effective contributor than Engeln and Johnson the other two freshman Maya's senior year as her minutes suggest.

You've done some nice research; I'll temper one claim because of it but double down on another.

You can compare talent based on what came out of high school, based on what happened in pros, their years in college or any combination of the three. Depending on the formula you use one cohort of teammates will come out better than the other. Perhaps there is the "One" best formula to determine talent level of teammates but that gets to another point. Is the talent of your teammates a discrete or continuous variable in terms of becoming championship caliber? I think it's pretty obvious we are talking about a discrete variable. As long as a certain threshold of talent is passed, your teammates can provide the material needed for a championship. I say it's a fools game to try to specially determine which set of teammates is the most talented, based on high school, college and/or pro performance, when what really matters is if they collectively passed a threshold of talent needed or not. Best players, like best coaches, will adapt to the specific type and quantity of talent they have around them as long as a certain level is reached. Taurasi, Stewart and Moore all had sufficient talent to work with for a championship, each one of their years.

The same might be said for quantifying experience, though your post leads me to recant the opinion that Moore may have had a little more experience surrounding her. Taurasi and Moore were both the respective leaders of inexperienced squads. To turn experience into a continuous variable for debate leads to the same faulty reasoning as with talent; I regret that I started on that path and you correctly called me out on it. Both the junior Taurasi and senior Moore were the leaders of what could be objectively classified inexperienced squads, at least as a discrete variable. Taurasi succeeded; Moore did not. I think Moore is probably a better all around player, though Taurasi's alleged faults such as with defense are largely Boneyard myth. Yet if I'm putting together a team, particularly one that must deal with inexperience, I'm starting with Taurasi without any deliberation.

I'd like to tack on what is more of a reply to hoophuskee here (who also provided a thought-provoking response). There's a famous anecdote of Auriemma conceding a game against Tennessee where we were seemingly down too much, too late. He later characterized Taurasi's response to his own defeatism as looking at him like he had two heads and proceeding to marginalize him from the huddle where she was rallying her teammates to win. Yes, Taurasi made THE clutch shot in that game, but they were behind by a bunch and she also got her teammates to do what they needed to do on defense and offense. Auriemma wants his players to read situations and take charge, particularly the leaders of the team, regardless of what even his own instructions are. Again, I don't want to paint Moore as faulty in this regards, more like Taurasi as exceptional.

 

[diggerfoot]

I agree- but I would like to add-- that year Maya lost- Geno had said two times he started the game off telling his team to get Maya going from the start. The other game was Stanford. Both games they lost. Geno changed the offense to start the game- though it is possible he did other times and didn't want his team taking blame. And I often wonder when you play a terrific team 4 times in one season like Maya had to do- how much that matters.

Look how fearful many get at the thought of having to play USF 4 times. Heck even Debbie Antonelli is out of her mind calling on USF to beat UCONN this year. And now with Stewie going head-to-head vs ND if she was a sophomore- could we have expected to beat them 4 times / a sweep in the past two years from her soph year till now? In a way Stewie and DT never had to go through the gauntlet of beating a strong well-coached offensive juggernaut team 4 times in a year like Maya had to.

Over the past 3 years there is no way UCONN would have gone "unscathed" vs ND if they we to have played 12 times. This play that game could very well have been in the NCAA tourney even though UCONN was superior and maybe would have beaten them three other times. Stewie would take a "hit" for that? I guess so. It becomes sooo subjective.

?? I think I understand the point you are trying to make ... see my response to UcMiami ... yet you are bringing up something that does not jive well with your post. Out of the three, Stewart had to face the most terrific opponent of all four times, the senior Diggins squad. The Notre Dame squads that Moore faced were not as opposing as the one Stewart beat when it had to be done. True, Stewart lost three times to them as an inexperienced freshman but won the most important game of all. Stewart was the most important player in helping us beat a better team at the most important time that year. Beating a strong but inferior team four times in a year is not as impressive to me as beating a strong and superior team only once, the one time that matters most. I can see the logic in always being able to beat a strong but inferior team, even four times in a row, as an indicator of greatness. I don't think that compares well with the greatness of beating a superior team when it matters most. Yes, our respective criterion for greatness is subjective, as is all of human endeavor even when using objective numbers to make claims more reliable, but at least it's not as beside the point as debating precisely which squad had better surrounding talent.

 

[CocoHusky]

Digger & UC great stuff as usually. I agree on many points but I would have to put Stewie (slightly) ahead of DT because of the individual growth which it took to get to what I consider the defining moments for DT-2004 Finals vs Tenn. and for Stewie 2013 Semi-final vs ND. Sewie made a greater leap IMO. That leap for Stewie including two dreadful games against ND shooting 1 of 7 and 5 of 17 and making her way into the UCONN starting lineup.
In the 2003-'04 Season UCONN beat Tenn. in Knoxville fairly comfortable during the regular season 81 to 67. It was not a giant leap to expect UCONN to beat Tenn. again in the Championship game on a neutral floor. In 2013 simis UCONN beating ND by such a wide margin was almost entirely due to Stewie's growth as a freshmen.

 

[meyers7]

Certainly one of the top three, along with you-know-who and damned if I know how (or why) you would rank one of them above the others. I am not entirely sure that it shouldn't be the top four, with Moriah only very slightly down the mountain from the others.

That's a good question. It's obvious Stewart is in the Top 3 (DT, Moore, Stewart), but is Jefferson in that second tier? (and with whom? Bird, Charles, Abrosimova, Lobo, Jefferson? KML?)

 

[CocoHusky]

That's a good question. It's obvious Stewart is in the Top 3 (DT, Moore, Stewart), but is Jefferson in that second tier? (and with whom? Bird, Charles, Abrosimova, Lobo, Jefferson? KML?)

Wolters Sales, Bascom....

 

[meyers7]

Nice post, but just a note of caution - we all have this impression that 2003 was Taurasi and a bunch of callow freshman - but the starters on that team were:
Taurasi - junior 37 games
Moore - red shirt sophomore 38 games
Conlon - junior 29 games
M Valley - junior 18 games
Battle - red shirt sophomore 13 games
Strother - freshman 38 games
Wolfe - freshman 10 games
Turner - freshman 7 games

So there were 55 games started by freshman - Ann averaged 31.5 minutes a game, Turner 20.8, and Crockett 15.9 and Nicole was injured in the 10th game and didn't return that season (25.8 minutes in those ten)

On Maya's senior team:
Maya - senior 38 games
Hayes - junior 38 games
Faris - sophomore 38 games
Hartley - freshman 36 games
Dolson - freshman 34 games
Dixon - senior 4 games
Buck - red shirt sophomore 1 game
Walker - freshman 1 game

Just looking at the two squads the scales are pegged to Taurasi as doing the most with the least. Besides Moore being a Sr vs DT as a Jr, Moore had Hayes (as a Jr) who was as good as anyone on DT's squad. Add in 2 eventual 2X AA's in Hartley and Dolson, and Faris who is arguably the best defensive player ever at UCONN, and the talent level is not even close between these two squads.

 

[Geew1992]

Every once in awhile this comes up, with comparisons to supporting casts. Taurasi, Moore and Stewart all had talented supporting casts, to emphatically insist that one supporting cast was better or worst than another only reveals the bias of the advocate. They were all talented; it's beyond the capabilities of any Boneyarder to demonstrate which was most or least talented aside from "because I say so."

However, there are a couple things we can decisively determine. Taurasi won a championship with decisively the least experienced talent. Maybe the talent of Strother, et al was greater or lesser than others ... once again, that cannot be objectively determined ... but they were undeniably the least experienced squad to win a UConn championship and they did so mainly because Taurasi led that team to overcome their inexperience. Whether Moore's teammates her senior year were a more talented bunch or not, which cannot be concluded outside of a biased "I say so," is beside the point. They were her team to lead and, if anything, a little more experienced than Taurasi's crew her junior year, and they could not get it done.

Moore scored a bunch (35 points?) in the last game she lost ... and I felt that was the problem. She did not know how to involve her team and make them better to the extent that Taurasi could. I'm not saying that Moore is bad at that, just that she could not do so like Taurasi. With Stewart we will never know. She always played with more experienced talent. I don't think she could do what Taurasi did with an inexperienced crew, but we will never know. However, Stewart did duplicate Taurasi's ability to lead an underdog to the championship ... and as a mere freshman. Moore only won championships while playing for teams that were heavy favorites. Granted, she was a big reason why they were heavy favorites, yet the same can be said for Taurasi and Stewart on their impressive teams. Only Taurasi and Stewart led teams that were not heavy favorites. In Stewart's case she was the key player in beating a team that already beat us three times that year.

For me, how one can lead a team to victory is the most important criterion for greatness. The greater the obstacles faced the greater the achievement. Taurasi overcame the greatest obstacles (though, in fairness, Stewart did not have the chance to overcome the inexperienced teammates obstacle), Stewart overcame the second greatest obstacle. For that reason I'd have to rank them Taurasi, Stewart and Moore.

I agree with everything you said except for Moore scoring the 35 points which may have been the problem. How many of those points did she score in the 4th quarter? I believe the rest of the team, especially Tiff Hayes and Bria Hartley, didn't show up. With that being said, yup, Taurasi did the most with least.