USA 16U Team Trials - General

[JordyG]

Ok so I'm going to break this down. We want, Brunelle, Bueckers, Fudd and Watson. Everyone good with that?

No. More please.

 

[Sluconn Husky]

Highlight vid #2 from the trials. Fudd, Boston, Brunelle, Bueckers, Taylor, Jones, Jackson, Burke, and Cooke. Lots of Brink too who seems to have captured the imagination around here.

 

[Charliebball]

Article on Watson making the team:

Mainland's Kylee Watson named to U.S. U-16 basketball team

Kylee is one of the most down to earth "stars" you will ever meet.........during a scrimmage last year she knocked my daughter down hard going for an offensive rebound.........after making the layup, she apologized profusely, then dashed down the court and blocked the next two shots down at the other end..........extremely coachable, always willing to work..........once her mid/outside game becomes more consistent she will be close to unstoppable......

 

[JustinesGuy]

Kylee is one of the most down to earth "stars" you will ever meet....during a scrimmage last year she knocked my daughter down hard going for an offensive rebound....after making the layup, she apologized profusely, then dashed down the court and blocked the next two shots down at the other end.....extremely coachable, always willing to work.....once her mid/outside game becomes more consistent she will be close to unstoppable.

What a great story.
I'm very high on her as well. This just adds to that.

 

[Charliebball]

Kenny Kalina's thoughts on the U16 USA Trials and how to make them better..............I think he actually has a few pretty good suggestions

My Take on USA Basketball by Kenny Kallina

 

[Sluconn Husky]

 

[Sluconn Husky]

 

[Sluconn Husky]

 

[Sluconn Husky]

 

[CocoHusky]

Kenny Kalina's thoughts on the U16 USA Trials and how to make them better....I think he actually has a few pretty good suggestions

My Take on USA Basketball by Kenny Kallina

Sorry but this is just discrete garbage, especially when you begin by stating where the members of the committee are from vs their qualifications for being on the committee!
Let's see how long it takes people to spot his obligatory UCONN slap.

 

[Charliebball]

Sorry but this is just discrete garbage, especially when you begin by stating where the members of the committee are from vs their qualifications for being on the committee!
Let's see how long it takes people to spot his obligatory UConn slap.

just one regarding a former UConn player as coach..........if it makes you feel any better I think he hates Nike more then he hates UConn............that said, I think his suggestions regarding year long training under international rules on courts with international markings makes a lot of sense if the USA wants to earn the gold.............

 

[Sluconn Husky]

Let's see how long it takes people to spot his obligatory UConn slap.

I have to admit, I don't see it. His complaints are normally that "the south" is underrepresented and underappreciated. I don't know why there would be a conspiracy against the south, but oh well.

 

[UcMiami]

OK - I'll weigh in on KK - I would say this is a whole bunch of BS and a good indication why I like USA basketball just as it is instead of some self centered, biased, ego tripper and his cohorts in the AAU/youth basketball world.

1. Where the committee is from is meaningless - they are all watching in CO for 96 hrs and selecting based on what they see - very few of them have watched much U16 basketball at either AAU or HS level with the exception of one HS coach from TX who has seen some U16 players in TX and one AAU affiliated person from PA who has probably seen most of the players at the trials once or twice. The selection process for invites is done based on regional 'scouts' associated with USA basketball who each pass on recommendations and the others allowed to pay their way do so based on an application process that includes video plus recommendations from HS and AAU coaches. The idea of creating a selection committee where each member has 'sponsored' a minimum of four players and a maximum of 11 is ludicrous and creates a really whacked out process. As it is now constituted, you may have two out of eight members with some bias and 6 who have no preconceptions about any of the trial participants. (Not sure why he throws in a WNBA rep - why not turn it over completely to the AAU bozos? We all now what a selfless job they all perform and how well they play with others.) Also notice how this selection committee of AAU folks get to make lots of money running camps from which they will select their anointed few - definitely a very democratic process.

2. Interesting he chooses 24 draftees as his analysis of regional strength - those draftees being six or seven years removed from the U16 attendees - as we all know the top end of talent is variable year by year by state - using the top 12 draftees (it is a twelve player team being selected) in 2016 their were 4 from the NE (NY, CT, MD, PA), 3 from the GL (MI, MN, IL), one each from TX, CA, GA, and NC. In 2017 3 from the NE (PA, NJ, MD) 4 from the South (FL, 2-GA, SC) two each from the SW (TX, AZ) and GL (MN, MI) and one from CA. It varies quite a bit by year and the NE (six years removed) outperforms CA and TX!)

3. People have been advocating that basketball in the US and internationally should standardize rules for a while now, as well as standardizing across gender, so nothing new here, but we cannot even standardize HS rules across state lines within a single gender. And asking kids to play two different sets of rules when they are still learning how to play and developing their skills seems pretty silly - imposing something on 1000s of players of whom only a few dozen in each class will ever actually play games under the international rules in their whole career.

4. Having a full time coaching staff for the U16/U17 team is an interesting idea - I believe the men do this - but is also an expensive idea for what is only ever a 4 week a year job. I assume the men's staff spends the other 48 weeks scouting prospective players? Not sure it makes a whole lot of sense nor is it likely cost effective. I suspect the men's teams have better financial commitments as is true for most athletics.

There is no question that USA operates on a different model than say the old USSR or even countries like Australia with a population and size comparable to TX. They have a basketball institute that functions like a prep school and college and in a semi-pro fashion. And they put together teams and train them from an early age and for much longer than any USA team prior to international competitions. The USA gets by on being able to call upon a much larger population and much greater participation levels. The athletic ability is incredible and the training while uneven is still very good. We still export coaches and athletes around the world. At some point, the preparation of each specific team is going to become an issue as it did in the early 90s for the NT - Tara taking a year away from Stanford and the team playing together for a year prior to the Olympics was a response to that issue - particularly because there were almost no US pro basketball players. With the WNBA and much greater international play by US players that is no longer an issue but it has created even shorter training camps for the national team.

For women basketball players and their families education still comes first because a pro career is still not very lucrative or likely - screwing around with HS age girls education and upbringing just to create a better U16/U17 team is not likely to be very popular or well supported. We have a few 'sports factory' HS/Prep Schools already with mixed results.

 

[UcMiami]

OK - I'll weigh in on KK - I would say this is a whole bunch of BS and a good indication why I like USA basketball just as it is instead of some self centered, biased, ego tripper and his cohorts in the AAU/youth basketball world.

1. Where the committee is from is meaningless - they are all watching in CO for 96 hrs and selecting based on what they see - very few of them have watched much U16 basketball at either AAU or HS level with the exception of one HS coach from TX who has seen some U16 players in TX and one AAU affiliated person from PA who has probably seen most of the players at the trials once or twice. The selection process for invites is done based on regional 'scouts' associated with USA basketball who each pass on recommendations and the others allowed to pay their way do so based on an application process that includes video plus recommendations from HS and AAU coaches. The idea of creating a selection committee where each member has 'sponsored' a minimum of four players and a maximum of 11 is ludicrous and creates a really whacked out process. As it is now constituted, you may have two out of eight members with some bias and 6 who have no preconceptions about any of the trial participants. (Not sure why he throws in a WNBA rep - why not turn it over completely to the AAU bozos? We all now what a selfless job they all perform and how well they play with others.) Also notice how this selection committee of AAU folks get to make lots of money running camps from which they will select their anointed few - definitely a very democratic process.

2. Interesting he chooses 24 draftees as his analysis of regional strength - those draftees being six or seven years removed from the U16 attendees - as we all know the top end of talent is variable year by year by state - using the top 12 draftees (it is a twelve player team being selected) in 2016 their were 4 from the NE (NY, CT, MD, PA), 3 from the GL (MI, MN, IL), one each from TX, CA, GA, and NC. In 2017 3 from the NE (PA, NJ, MD) 4 from the South (FL, 2-GA, SC) two each from the SW (TX, AZ) and GL (MN, MI) and one from CA. It varies quite a bit by year and the NE (six years removed) outperforms CA and TX!)

3. People have been advocating that basketball in the US and internationally should standardize rules for a while now, as well as standardizing across gender, so nothing new here, but we cannot even standardize HS rules across state lines within a single gender. And asking kids to play two different sets of rules when they are still learning how to play and developing their skills seems pretty silly - imposing something on 1000s of players of whom only a few dozen in each class will ever actually play games under the international rules in their whole career.

4. Having a full time coaching staff for the U16/U17 team is an interesting idea - I believe the men do this - but is also an expensive idea for what is only ever a 4 week a year job. I assume the men's staff spends the other 48 weeks scouting prospective players? Not sure it makes a whole lot of sense nor is it likely cost effective. I suspect the men's teams have better financial commitments as is true for most athletics.

There is no question that USA operates on a different model than say the old USSR or even countries like Australia with a population and size comparable to TX. They have a basketball institute that functions like a prep school and college and in a semi-pro fashion. And they put together teams and train them from an early age and for much longer than any USA team prior to international competitions. The USA gets by on being able to call upon a much larger population and much greater participation levels. The athletic ability is incredible and the training while uneven is still very good. We still export coaches and athletes around the world. At some point, the preparation of each specific team is going to become an issue as it did in the early 90s for the NT - Tara taking a year away from Stanford and the team playing together for a year prior to the Olympics was a response to that issue - particularly because there were almost no US pro basketball players. With the WNBA and much greater international play by US players that is no longer an issue but it has created even shorter training camps for the national team.

For women basketball players and their families education still comes first because a pro career is still not very lucrative or likely - screwing around with HS age girls education and upbringing just to create a better U16/U17 team is not likely to be very popular or well supported. We have a few 'sports factory' HS/Prep Schools already with mixed results.

ON Edit - as to the gratuitous hit at the coach - actually FF quality D2/D3 coaches (and D1 solid mid-majors) are the closest you can get to coaches who are used to coaching a U16/U17 quality team - the D2/D3 talent pool is comprised of kids a few years older that compare pretty colosely to D1 quality kids a few years younger. There are no HS coaches that have the kind of talent pool a USA trial produces, and AAU coaches don't coach they just manage their traveling circuses. The U16 team even in 'off years' is full of proteges who should thrive under the right college coaches.

 

[CocoHusky]

I have to admit, I don't see it. His complaints are normally that "the south" is underrepresented and underappreciated. I don't know why there would be a conspiracy against the south, but oh well.

"You need to get a coach who is used to coaching this level of talent and this age of player right now we have neither, but we do have someone who played at UConn which is more important right?"
Completely uncalled for IMO.

 

[CocoHusky]

OK - I'll weigh in on KK - I would say this is a whole bunch of BS and a good indication why I like USA basketball just as it is instead of some self centered, biased, ego tripper and his cohorts in the AAU/youth basketball world.

1. Where the committee is from is meaningless - they are all watching in CO for 96 hrs and selecting based on what they see - very few of them have watched much U16 basketball at either AAU or HS level with the exception of one HS coach from TX who has seen some U16 players in TX and one AAU affiliated person from PA who has probably seen most of the players at the trials once or twice. The selection process for invites is done based on regional 'scouts' associated with USA basketball who each pass on recommendations and the others allowed to pay their way do so based on an application process that includes video plus recommendations from HS and AAU coaches. The idea of creating a selection committee where each member has 'sponsored' a minimum of four players and a maximum of 11 is ludicrous and creates a really whacked out process. As it is now constituted, you may have two out of eight members with some bias and 6 who have no preconceptions about any of the trial participants. (Not sure why he throws in a WNBA rep - why not turn it over completely to the AAU bozos? We all now what a selfless job they all perform and how well they play with others.) Also notice how this selection committee of AAU folks get to make lots of money running camps from which they will select their anointed few - definitely a very democratic process.

2. Interesting he chooses 24 draftees as his analysis of regional strength - those draftees being six or seven years removed from the U16 attendees - as we all know the top end of talent is variable year by year by state - using the top 12 draftees (it is a twelve player team being selected) in 2016 their were 4 from the NE (NY, CT, MD, PA), 3 from the GL (MI, MN, IL), one each from TX, CA, GA, and NC. In 2017 3 from the NE (PA, NJ, MD) 4 from the South (FL, 2-GA, SC) two each from the SW (TX, AZ) and GL (MN, MI) and one from CA. It varies quite a bit by year and the NE (six years removed) outperforms CA and TX!)

3. People have been advocating that basketball in the US and internationally should standardize rules for a while now, as well as standardizing across gender, so nothing new here, but we cannot even standardize HS rules across state lines within a single gender. And asking kids to play two different sets of rules when they are still learning how to play and developing their skills seems pretty silly - imposing something on 1000s of players of whom only a few dozen in each class will ever actually play games under the international rules in their whole career.

4. Having a full time coaching staff for the U16/U17 team is an interesting idea - I believe the men do this - but is also an expensive idea for what is only ever a 4 week a year job. I assume the men's staff spends the other 48 weeks scouting prospective players? Not sure it makes a whole lot of sense nor is it likely cost effective. I suspect the men's teams have better financial commitments as is true for most athletics.

There is no question that USA operates on a different model than say the old USSR or even countries like Australia with a population and size comparable to TX. They have a basketball institute that functions like a prep school and college and in a semi-pro fashion. And they put together teams and train them from an early age and for much longer than any USA team prior to international competitions. The USA gets by on being able to call upon a much larger population and much greater participation levels. The athletic ability is incredible and the training while uneven is still very good. We still export coaches and athletes around the world. At some point, the preparation of each specific team is going to become an issue as it did in the early 90s for the NT - Tara taking a year away from Stanford and the team playing together for a year prior to the Olympics was a response to that issue - particularly because there were almost no US pro basketball players. With the WNBA and much greater international play by US players that is no longer an issue but it has created even shorter training camps for the national team.

For women basketball players and their families education still comes first because a pro career is still not very lucrative or likely - screwing around with HS age girls education and upbringing just to create a better U16/U17 team is not likely to be very popular or well supported. We have a few 'sports factory' HS/Prep Schools already with mixed results.

@UcMiami you have given this article way too much though. This is hot garbage! In consideration of Tamika Catchings credentials to be on the committee the second thing listed is that she went to HS in New Jersey. That is both wrong (Catch played HS ball in Duncanville, TX) and completely irrelevant to her credentials to be on the committee. I guess credentials like, 4 time Olympian with more than a decade of playing international basketball is not worthy.

 

[UcMiami]

@UcMiami you have given this article way too much though. This is hot garbage! In consideration of Tamika Catchings credentials to be on the committee the second thing listed is that she went to HS in New Jersey. That is both wrong (Catch played HS ball in Duncanville, TX) and completely irrelevant to her credentials to be on the committee. I guess credentials like, 4 time Olympian with more than a decade of playing international basketball is not worthy.

Agree, but I got on a roll! And it pissed me off! (Catch has two decades of international basketball by the way. And I certainly wouldn't envy her or any other sacrificial athlete placed on such a committee as a figurehead to try and give it a hint of respectability.)

It wasn't until the second time through that I really started thinking about the fiefdoms he wants to create for the AAU crowd - 5 regional gatekeepers for USA basketball admission, with 4 other at large members controlling the access to entry level USA participation. All of them with strong financial/commercial interests at odds with actually selecting the best team for USA. These gatekeepers he anticipates would be incentivized by being able to run their own camps and tournaments for profits where parents and the outsider AAU teams would be allowed to buy access to their wisdom and evaluation skills, while the shoe companies and rating services would be empowered to provide at large access.
All in all a nice privatization of a national institution with profits for everyone derived from milking the families of young athletes further. What could possibly go wrong.

 

[Sluconn Husky]

Very detailed look at the trials from PBR's Shane Laflin.. Lots of info on what drills were done and how things were processed. He also profiles the final 18 players. Below are the UConn-connected players.


CELESTE TAYLOR – (2019 NY) Prototypical 2 guard; has a brilliant fundamental base – uses jabs & shots fakes very well to get to her 1 or 2 bounce pull up jumper. The 3 ball is nice; she is an explosive finisher at the rim and can finish in a variety of ways. She is economical in the way she uses her dribbles – never pounding that thing too much. Great feel for the game. (Invitee)


KYLEE WATSON – (2020 NJ) Workhorse! Her footwork in and around the paint is A1. She seals extremely well and feels the defense and counters very well. She has nice face up game. She is a good passer and is well aware of spacing and placement on the floor. A couple of times she got a long rebound, pushed the ball with impressive speed and made great decisions. (Invitee)


MADDIE BURKE – (2020 PA) SHOOTER! She has a great frame to be a wonderful shooter for a long time. There is a perfection to her release that leads to really crisp makes; she showed a bit of shake off the bounce as well. She has a bit of Katie Smith (Ohio State/WNBA) to her game – she plays very hard and is good on the glass. Wonderful fundamental foundation to her game. (Invitee)


ZIA COOKE – (2019 OH) Electric with the rock!! She is quick, fast, athletic… all of that. She stood out from Day 1 to Day 4. This PG can dance with that thing.. She knows how to create angles in small space to shake her defender to score or create for teammates. She showed a nice 3 ball, pull up, and finishing at the rim. She competed defensively and always put pressure on the other team with ball pressure or pushing the ball down the floor. She showed nice leadership attributes as well. Has some Tyler Scaife/Kelsey Mitchell/Russell Westbrook elements to her game. (Invitee)


AZZI FUDD – (2021 VA) Eye opening young guard. She is poised well beyond her years. She is physically strong and had no problem competing with players older than her. Her eyes are up and she distributes the ball and controls the tempo of games by leading her team. She has a nice pull up – elevation and high release. She is going to be fun to continue to watch. (Applicant Athlete)


HALEY JONES – (2019 CA) “Swiss Army Knife” type of game; She is a very good all around basketball player that can truly play positions 2-4 because she has the skill and IQ to do so. She understands flow, reads the floor so well, and can score in a variety of ways. She got on the glass well and can rebound and lead the break or sprint the lane and get ahead of the break. I’m a big fan.. (Invitee)


ALIYAH BOSTON – (2019 MA) Major post presence. Had an impressive showing last year at U17’s and did not disappoint this year. She has true back to the basket game and a nice touch in finishing from the HP area and just outside the paint. Strong and powerful athlete who is locked in and competitive – very reliable!! (Invitee)


SAM BRUNELLE – (2019 VA) The vet! By making last year’s team, Brunelle opened eyes all over the world to her talent. She is as fundamentally sound as they come – range, vision, handle, post game, perimeter game. She looks to be in great shape and showed leadership qualities. She is going to be a weapon in their system and will be able to play multiple spots for Team USA. (Invitee)


PAIGE BUECKERS – (2020 MN) Hooper!! She has a wonderful feel for the game and can dance a bit with the rock. She is a good shooter with PG skills that make her a threat every time she touches the ball. Defensively she uses her anticipation skills, quickness, and length to get to the right spots to disrupt her opponents – she got a ton of tips and steals. She is no stranger to the gym – she can play! (Invitee)


2017 U16 USA Basketball Trials

 

[Sluconn Husky]

Piece on the California contingent at the US trials that all missed the final cut. If you read the author's twitter feed, apparently there is a bias against the west coast. So we can add that to Kallina's anti-south theory.

Why no Cali girls on U.S. U16 bb team?

 

[CocoHusky]

Piece on the California contingent at the US trials that all missed the final cut. If you read the author's twitter feed, apparently there is a bias against the west coast. So we can add that to Kallina's anti-south theory.

Why no Cali girls on U.S. U16 bb team?

Did not realize that Te-Hina Paopao was dealing with an ACL injury. For her to make it that far in the trials is remarkable.

 

[Charliebball]

I assume the USA and Canada are the two favorites........ they don't play against each other in prelims......

 

[UcMiami]

Very detailed look at the trials from PBR's Shane Laflin.. Lots of info on what drills were done and how things were processed. He also profiles the final 18 players. Below are the UConn-connected players.


CELESTE TAYLOR – (2019 NY) Prototypical 2 guard; has a brilliant fundamental base – uses jabs & shots fakes very well to get to her 1 or 2 bounce pull up jumper. The 3 ball is nice; she is an explosive finisher at the rim and can finish in a variety of ways. She is economical in the way she uses her dribbles – never pounding that thing too much. Great feel for the game. (Invitee)


KYLEE WATSON – (2020 NJ) Workhorse! Her footwork in and around the paint is A1. She seals extremely well and feels the defense and counters very well. She has nice face up game. She is a good passer and is well aware of spacing and placement on the floor. A couple of times she got a long rebound, pushed the ball with impressive speed and made great decisions. (Invitee)


MADDIE BURKE – (2020 PA) SHOOTER! She has a great frame to be a wonderful shooter for a long time. There is a perfection to her release that leads to really crisp makes; she showed a bit of shake off the bounce as well. She has a bit of Katie Smith (Ohio State/WNBA) to her game – she plays very hard and is good on the glass. Wonderful fundamental foundation to her game. (Invitee)


ZIA COOKE – (2019 OH) Electric with the rock!! She is quick, fast, athletic… all of that. She stood out from Day 1 to Day 4. This PG can dance with that thing.. She knows how to create angles in small space to shake her defender to score or create for teammates. She showed a nice 3 ball, pull up, and finishing at the rim. She competed defensively and always put pressure on the other team with ball pressure or pushing the ball down the floor. She showed nice leadership attributes as well. Has some Tyler Scaife/Kelsey Mitchell/Russell Westbrook elements to her game. (Invitee)


AZZI FUDD – (2021 VA) Eye opening young guard. She is poised well beyond her years. She is physically strong and had no problem competing with players older than her. Her eyes are up and she distributes the ball and controls the tempo of games by leading her team. She has a nice pull up – elevation and high release. She is going to be fun to continue to watch. (Applicant Athlete)


HALEY JONES – (2019 CA) “Swiss Army Knife” type of game; She is a very good all around basketball player that can truly play positions 2-4 because she has the skill and IQ to do so. She understands flow, reads the floor so well, and can score in a variety of ways. She got on the glass well and can rebound and lead the break or sprint the lane and get ahead of the break. I’m a big fan.. (Invitee)


ALIYAH BOSTON – (2019 MA) Major post presence. Had an impressive showing last year at U17’s and did not disappoint this year. She has true back to the basket game and a nice touch in finishing from the HP area and just outside the paint. Strong and powerful athlete who is locked in and competitive – very reliable!! (Invitee)


SAM BRUNELLE – (2019 VA) The vet! By making last year’s team, Brunelle opened eyes all over the world to her talent. She is as fundamentally sound as they come – range, vision, handle, post game, perimeter game. She looks to be in great shape and showed leadership qualities. She is going to be a weapon in their system and will be able to play multiple spots for Team USA. (Invitee)


PAIGE BUECKERS – (2020 MN) Hooper!! She has a wonderful feel for the game and can dance a bit with the rock. She is a good shooter with PG skills that make her a threat every time she touches the ball. Defensively she uses her anticipation skills, quickness, and length to get to the right spots to disrupt her opponents – she got a ton of tips and steals. She is no stranger to the gym – she can play! (Invitee)


2017 U16 USA Basketball Trials

Really long article but well worth the read and the conclusions after the athlete break downs is well worth a read. Interesting to know how the trials actually run session by session and the coach's eye comments give an indication of the evaluation and short comings of the pool of players in each phase.

Piece on the California contingent at the US trials that all missed the final cut. If you read the author's twitter feed, apparently there is a bias against the west coast. So we can add that to Kallina's anti-south theory.

Why no Cali girls on U.S. U16 bb team?

Didn't read the twitter but the article I though was accepting of the selection process and identified where work was still needed for the players - not claiming bias at all.

 

[Sluconn Husky]

Didn't read the twitter but the article I though was accepting of the selection process and identified where work was still needed for the players - not claiming bias at all.

From the article author:

 

[MilfordHusky]

Some folks have been comparing Sam Brunelle to Elena. Watching that last video, I see the underhand scoop shot and a couple of other things that remind me of our very own Lou.

 

[Sluconn Husky]

Speaking of Brunelle:


Samantha Brunelle, the top-ranked girls basketball player in the Class of 2019, will be writing a diary for USA TODAY High School Sports in her experiences with the USA Basketball U16 Women’s National Team in Argentina. Here we introduce you to her:

Samantha Brunelle, No. 1 girls hooper in 2019, is Team USA leader in words and actions