Sue Bird, Diana Taurasi open door for Team USA return | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Sue Bird, Diana Taurasi open door for Team USA return

Moriah is definitely a pass-first point guard. Many of her points were on breakaways after steals. She drove through the defense when there were openings and took open jumpers, but she wanted to find Stef, Kaleena, Stewie, and Morgan for high percentage shots. Moriah set the career record for assists at UConn. She shoots when it's appropriate but doesn't force shots. San Antonio does not have great finishers other than KMac, so Mo needs to shoot to give her team a chance of winning.
 
If they don't start to look to the future in '20, what is '24 gonna look like? Anyway that's still 3 years away. How Bird, Taurasi, Whalen, Augustus etc. are playing right now is completely irrelevant.
I strongly disagree. If they are showing signs of decreased performance, it's reasonable to attribute it to age and view it as irreversible. Lindsay looked a little old and tired in 2015, but took last winter off. Seimone may have lost a little, but looks brilliant at times. Some of their decreased output reflects the Lynx's increased focus on getting the ball to Sylvia.

If they are still playing great ball now, it's perfectly reasonable to think that they can continue it into 2018. Though some think the Olympics are the big prize, Team USA still wants to field the best possible team in 2018. As of the moment, that would include Sue and Diana.
 
This really is the issue, I think. No coach wants to be that coach. Geno wanted to head in to the world championships and olympics with guards he could trust and I'm sure Dawn will feel the same way. USA BB gave Sims a shot as the 3rd point guard at the 2014 world championships but she barely played (and didn't look so hot in the minutes she did get). USA BB went in to the 2016 Olympics with Taurasi as the 3rd point guard which tells you something. We'll see next year who USA BB thinks is worthy of taking the reins from Sue Bird and Lindsay Whalen.

Yep, it comes down to the fact that the transition is going from Bird/Whalen/Taurasi to whoever is next is going to be bumpy. So do you want to bite the bullet now and start phasing in some new blood? Or do you ride those three until they can't go anymore and then risk having to go to a major tournament with no experienced point guards? I prefer for the former strategy but I can see why some would want to kick the can down the road and wait for the problem to solve itself.

Ideally, someone would establish herself as a no-doubt selection (the way EDD did with her WNBA play) but the closest we got to that was one good pre-injury season from Diggins.
 
I don't understand the idea that a star-laden team must have a pass-first point guard.

Doesn't the dominance of Steph Curry's Warriors sort of disprove that notion?
 
When was Jefferson the 5th option? Her freshman year yeah, but not after that.
In her Sophomore year Moriah was 5th on the team in shot attempts=5th option.
It was not until her Junior year that she moved out of the 5th position into 4 behind Kia Nurse.
Her senior year she moved into the 3rd position behind Stewie and Morgan.
 
In her Sophomore year Moriah was 5th on the team in shot attempts=5th option.
It was not until her Junior year that she moved out of the 5th position into 4 behind Kia Nurse.
Her senior year she moved into the 3rd position behind Stewie and Morgan.
And many of her shot attempts were on breakaways.
 
.-.
I don't understand the idea that a star-laden team must have a pass-first point guard.

Doesn't the dominance of Steph Curry's Warriors sort of disprove that notion?
Rightly or wrongly, a pass-first PG seems be what USA BB prefers.

Steph is an exception, probably the best shooter in the world. No one, including Skylar or Odyssey, is close to Steph on the women side. Diana would be the closest comparison.
 
Rightly or wrongly, a pass-first PG seems be what USA BB prefers.

Steph is an exception, probably the best shooter in the world. No one, including Skylar or Odyssey, is close to Steph on the women side. Diana would be the closest comparison.

Steph's not that much of an outlier given that the 2nd best team also featured a scoring PG in Kyrie Irving.
 
Steph's not that much of an outlier given that the 2nd best team also featured a scoring PG in Kyrie Irving.

Who was the last pass first PG for the men's team? John Stockton?
 
When was Jefferson the 5th option? Her freshman year yeah, but not after that.

The point is she has the personal make-up and mentality that would gladly accept that role for the good of the team.
 
.-.
The point is she has the personal make-up and mentality that would gladly accept that role for the good of the team.

So would Chelsea Gray... But no one besides Sparks and Duke fans woukd know that :rolleyes:
 
The point is she has the personal make-up and mentality that would gladly accept that role for the good of the team.
The role a player is willing to "accept" should be the very last tie breaking criteria and probably best if not considered at all. The best player should be selected PERIOD! This is the pinnacle of the profession and an opportunity that only comes around every 4 years. Player are also invited to tryout, and that would be a good time for any player to individually decide what role they are willing to accept.
For those that are suggesting that Wilson get's an advantage because Dawn will be the coach, does that also mean Moriah will get less consideration because Geno is not?
 
I don't understand the idea that a star-laden team must have a pass-first point guard.

Doesn't the dominance of Steph Curry's Warriors sort of disprove that notion?
Because while NBA/WNBA teams are designed around a few stars and a bunch of support players, USA NTs are designed around 10 stars and maybe 2 trainees/insurance policies. And the women's game still depends on players taking good shots more than offensive players doing there own thing. Whalen has certainly been more of an offensive minded PG than Sue on the NT, but remains a pass first player. DT on the NT team alternates between facilitator and scorer. What has distinguished the USA NT has been the willingness of all of the players to sublimate their personal skills to team goals - the 'selfish' players and first options have been post players, with forwards and wings as well as guards generally being pass first players. It was why Geno was such a good match for team USA as it is how his Uconn teams play as well. And I suspect Dawn will follow along the same lines - it is how she played for USA, Her SC teams have been more star oriented but that is mostly because she hasn't had the balance of talent she will have coaching the NT.
 
I don't understand the idea that a star-laden team must have a pass-first point guard.

Doesn't the dominance of Steph Curry's Warriors sort of disprove that notion?

I was young and don't remember this clearly: Was Dawn Staley a pass-first PG?
 
The role a player is willing to "accept" should be the very last tie breaking criteria and probably best if not considered at all. The best player should be selected PERIOD! This is the pinnacle of the profession and an opportunity that only comes around every 4 years. Player are also invited to tryout, and that would be a good time for any player to individually decide what role they are willing to accept.
For those that are suggesting that Wilson get's an advantage because Dawn will be the coach, does that also mean Moriah will get less consideration because Geno is not?
I think Moriah might get slightly less consideration with Geno not being coach, but more because she will be less in sync with another coach than she would be with her former college coach.
I understand what you are saying about 'the role a player is willing to accept' but I think that is still a very important consideration with building any team and especially a NT. The ability of a player who has started every game she has played since she was 10 through college and her professional career, to 'accept' and thrive as a bench player on the NT is not a given. A player who is used to taking 30% of her team's shots to recognize that her normal shots are not the best shots for the team and to pass when she normally would force a shot is not a given.
Angel who appears to have been a difficult teammate on many of the teams she has played on while being the dominant scorer on every one of them, actually thrived on most of her USA teams when given a very different role as a change of pace bench player - she found/was given a defined niche that suited her strengths and that she was willing to accept and appeared to really enjoy. Other players might not be so happy or so willing.

On a lot of under performing teams you can see at the end of a game the 'I am going to be the hero' mentality of certain players - who then more often than not lose the game for their team because they have forgotten their teammates. Not talking about the player willing to take the last shot, but the one who forces the last shot while ignoring their wide open teammate standing under the rim.
 
.-.
Because while NBA/WNBA teams are designed around a few stars and a bunch of support players, USA NTs are designed around 10 stars and maybe 2 trainees/insurance policies. And the women's game still depends on players taking good shots more than offensive players doing there own thing.

As has been alluded to, the men's US basketball team features point guards that are known as scorers. The 2016 gold medal team's point guards were Kyrie Irving and Kyle Lowry who averaged 19.6 ppg and 21.2 ppg, respectively in the season before the Olympics.

I agree that the women's game requires teamwork. Playing a scoring point guard does not mean that the offensive players are "doing their own thing". Again, the Warriors play great team basketball with a scoring point guard.
 
I think Moriah might get slightly less consideration with Geno not being coach, but more because she will be less in sync with another coach than she would be with her former college coach.
I understand what you are saying about 'the role a player is willing to accept' but I think that is still a very important consideration with building any team and especially a NT. The ability of a player who has started every game she has played since she was 10 through college and her professional career, to 'accept' and thrive as a bench player on the NT is not a given. A player who is used to taking 30% of her team's shots to recognize that her normal shots are not the best shots for the team and to pass when she normally would force a shot is not a given.
Angel who appears to have been a difficult teammate on many of the teams she has played on while being the dominant scorer on every one of them, actually thrived on most of her USA teams when given a very different role as a change of pace bench player - she found/was given a defined niche that suited her strengths and that she was willing to accept and appeared to really enjoy. Other players might not be so happy or so willing.

On a lot of under performing teams you can see at the end of a game the 'I am going to be the hero' mentality of certain players - who then more often than not lose the game for their team because they have forgotten their teammates. Not talking about the player willing to take the last shot, but the one who forces the last shot while ignoring their wide open teammate standing under the rim.
Angel being given a role is precisely opposite of what I'm concerned about in the selection of the team but it still provides an excellent example. My concern is that Angel would not be selected for the team because in the judgment of someone, Angel would not be willing to accept a certain role. These are once in a life time opportunity, you would be surprised what roles players would be willing to accept to be part of these teams. Similar to UCONN's approach to recruiting, you should pick the best player available for the basketball things your team is trying to accomplish. Remarkably enough some pretty good "role" players end up at UCONN and work in perfect harmony with super recruits to win NC. There will always be roles to fill because this is a team sport, if you eliminate people from consideration for a certain role they will never get an opportunity to surprise you ( in a good way) like Angel did.
 
As has been alluded to, the men's US basketball team features point guards that are known as scorers. The 2016 gold medal team's point guards were Kyrie Irving and Kyle Lowry who averaged 19.6 ppg and 21.2 ppg, respectively in the season before the Olympics.

I agree that the women's game requires teamwork. Playing a scoring point guard does not mean that the offensive players are "doing their own thing". Again, the Warriors play great team basketball with a scoring point guard.
Interestingly the USA men's team - Irving averaged 11.4 points and 4.9 assists while Lowry averaged 5 pts and 3.8 assists so they played a very different style from their NBA teams. Irving was 5th on the team in shot attempts and Lowry was 9th. The players on that team averaged .369 shots per man/minute played while the two PGs averaged .308 shots per man minute, so fewer shots than the four other players on the court at the same time - sort of the definition of a pass first PG.
 
Angel being given a role is precisely opposite of what I'm concerned about in the selection of the team but it still provides an excellent example. My concern is that Angel would not be selected for the team because in the judgment of someone, Angel would not be willing to accept a certain role. These are once in a life time opportunity, you would be surprised what roles players would be willing to accept to be part of these teams. Similar to UConn's approach to recruiting, you should pick the best player available for the basketball things your team is trying to accomplish. Remarkably enough some pretty good "role" players end up at UConn and work in perfect harmony with super recruits to win NC. There will always be roles to fill because this is a team sport, if you eliminate people from consideration for a certain role they will never get an opportunity to surprise you ( in a good way) like Angel did.
That is why I said I understood what you were saying, and I agree that you cannot assume anything with regard to the NT though I think the evaluation of the team pool is a process that does look to identify that willingness. And I think most people on this board felt that the Parker situation for the 2016 team was exactly related to how she had handled the situation in the past (not an assumption but a historical reference.) I don't want to open that can of worms again but it is the obvious example with respect to the NT.

The other aspect is most people do focus on offensive skills when evaluating who should and shouldn't be selected, while USA really does focus a lot of evaluation on defense as well. I actually think the selections of Sims over Diggins had nothing to do with Griner and a lot to do with defensive intensity.
 
For those that are suggesting that Wilson get's an advantage because Dawn will be the coach, does that also mean Moriah will get less consideration because Geno is not?
Yes
 
I hope you are wrong. I think 6 players would have been in consideration for 2018/20 for 1 (Bird) or 2 ( Bird & Whalen's) spots on the national team. I see these as guard spots more than "pure" PG spots because quite frankly I'm not sure Dawn would know what to do with a pure PG since it's been a minute since Dawn has coached one. Kmac, Jewell, Courtney, Moriah, Oddsey and Skylar. Courtney has bowed out. I like Moriah's chances because of her ability to apply on ball pressure well above the others. I really really like Moriah's chances if it ends up being two spots.
 
.-.
Interestingly the USA men's team - Irving averaged 11.4 points and 4.9 assists while Lowry averaged 5 pts and 3.8 assists so they played a very different style from their NBA teams. Irving was 5th on the team in shot attempts and Lowry was 9th. The players on that team averaged .369 shots per man/minute played while the two PGs averaged .308 shots per man minute, so fewer shots than the four other players on the court at the same time - sort of the definition of a pass first PG.

That's fair and that's why it bothers me when people say that Diggins and Sims and whoever else aren't "suited" for the national team. Players can adjust the way the play to fit the needs of the national team.
 
IIRC Sims wasn't a big time scorer until her Sr. year at Baylor, after Griner graduated. Diggins may have been a scorer throughout her career at Notre Dame but she was a member of some really good teams that had some balanced scoring. Agree w/ above poster, I'm not convinced at this point that either of those players are bad fits for the NT. I keep harping on it, but if not in '20 then definitely in '24 there are going to need to be some new guards playing for the NT. Maybe Jefferson is one of them, but somebody else needs to fill some slots. Who knows, by '24 maybe Ionescu will be the best guard in the U.S...



Maybe women's basketball is totally different in this regard, but I don't really think so. Pass first PG is kind of a thing of the past for the most part. Most of the best PG are scoring threats. They don't have to be the first option, but they definitely aren't the last option. You can facilitate an offense and still have plenty of scoring opportunities yourself.
 
Just out of curiosity I looked at college stats for Sims and Diggins. Both were over 500 career assists and not all that far behind Jefferson. Kelsey Plum who was obviously a shoot first PG also had over 500 in her career. Jefferson's 659 look kinda paltry compared to Vandersloot's 1118.
 
It's probably worth remembering the words of Geno and Dawn Staley in February of 2016. They both addressed the point guard issues and they could not have been more direct that the young guards had not shown that they're ready for the job.

"Right now there is no clear cut person that you would say that’s the next one,’’ Auriemma said. "It was easy when (Bird) was coming out because whoever they had – Teresa Edwards, Dawn Staley, that group – and Sue was coming out. They brought her over there, her and (Diana Taurasi), and said, 'OK, these are the next two.’ It’s not that easy right now to go, 'OK, here it is.’ Because if it was they’d be on the team this year. But in the next two years somebody’s going to have to emerge between now and the World Championship in 2018.’’

Dawn, who was the point guard in 3 Olympics, also addressed the failure of the younger guards to step up and prove they belong on the team:

"There are players that have some of the attributes,’’ Staley said. "I haven’t seen a complete one yet. And I think that’s a big question mark because every point guard that has been the leader for our USA Basketball team had someone that was their understudy.

"It’s a duty of service,’’ Staley said. "You’re serving other people. It’s selflessness. It’s all the intangibles it takes for a team to be successful. And that’s hard because some of the younger point guards they’re more scoring point guards. And because they think being aggressive and getting their shot off and to get in the flow, they miss a step when it comes to being the fourth or fifth option on a USA Basketball National Team level. So it takes adjusting. It takes an adjustment for some of the younger players.’’


Geno and Dawn are just coaches whose role with USA Basketball was and is to coach the team to a championship every 2 years. There are others, Carol Callan and Selection Committee members, whose job it is to take care of USA Basketball in the long term. The fact that the Selection Committee has not yet identified the next point guard to lead USA Basketball says a lot. There will be a training camp in Sept/Oct of this year so maybe we'll get a sense of which direction USA BB might go in for its guard play.



 
UconnCat - thanks for searching out those comments, i remember reading them but was too lazy to search for them. Certainly seems pretty clear what the former and new coach are looking for.

NWHoopfan - the Uconn system is much more likely to produce 4 or 5 players each year with 100 assists than a player that comes close to the top 5 in total assists per year. Uconn consistently as a team is in the top three in total assists each year (and often #1) just as they are near the top of points per game - but no individual player dominates either scoring or assists - The career totals for the Uconn 'great' PGs - Sue, DT, and Moriah are half of what the NCAA career records are.

I agree that PGs need to be scoring threats to be really good - even a great passer needs to demand defensive attention as a scorer to be really effective. Early in Moriah's career she was left unguarded by a few teams (Tara and Stanford for example) and struggle to make them pay - by her junior and senior years no one was taking that chance. The reason Sue and DT are the best ever international backcourt (and were so deadly in 2002 in college) is because DT is a scoring guard who is a great passers and Sue is a PG who is a very efficient scorer.

The trick for a great PG is knowing when to shoot and being efficient - the first job is to get the offense running smoothly and the other four players on the court comfortable and passing them the ball in the best spots for them to score, the second job is to provide an outlet for the other players when the defense closes them down and be a threat to score on that return pass while knowing when to take that opening vs. making another pass to someone else. Too many of the really good guards spend so much time on teams where they are expected to carry a significant amount of the scoring that it is hard for them to know which of their normal shots they should take and which they shouldn't. On a national team loaded with scoring stars, if the PG is averaging 1/5 or more of the shots taken in the minutes she is on the court there is a problem - in any given game she might average over that 1/5 based on the defense being played, but in aggregate over multiple games it suggest the team is in trouble.

The same issue exists for all the other players on the USA national team to a lesser extent - with so many scoring options on the floor all the time figuring out who should actually shoot on each possession is different from pretty much any other team they play on. Which shots they should take and having no doubt about it when they do shoot is part of the learning process.

And we see that learning process every year with the Uconn team as well - Napheesa in particular really frustrated Geno her freshman year. In practice he said they would pass her the ball in the lane and no one could stop her scoring, but as soon as she got into a live game she would refuse to shoot when she got the pass - she was too busy deferring to the older players. She seemed to solve that issue pretty effectively last year! :eek::) (To the point that Geno starting commenting on her lack of assists!:rolleyes:)

NW - on the non-scoring PGs - Allen (ND) and Johnson (Baylor) both had tons of college assists and were great PGs but have struggled catching on with WNBA rosters because they aren't good enough scorers - I think they both can get there, but they are the examples of players who are too far into the 'pass first, pass only' class of PG. Kelly Faris (not a PG) is another player who has struggled for the same reason.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps those 24-27 year old starting PG's in the WNBA should start searching for another country to possibly represent in the 2020 Olympics :oops:


Parker is toast. The fact still remains that there are 2 players at her position who are better - EDD & Stew.

Nneka will be a fierce competitor. If the Olympics were 2018, she'd easily make it over Wilson. But since it's 2020 ...

Hmmmmmm .... I dunno about that...... you are talking about currently better.... or better in 2020?
 
.-.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,363
Messages
4,567,866
Members
10,471
Latest member
EO2004


Top Bottom